Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 01:29:49 +0100 From: Erik Trulsson <ertr1013@student.uu.se> To: Michael <bsdquestions@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD - Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: cvsup tag for ports Message-ID: <20070211002949.GA6384@falcon.midgard.homeip.net> In-Reply-To: <45CE5846.80002@gmail.com> References: <45CE41ED.3050900@gmail.com> <20070210230636.GA5968@falcon.midgard.homeip.net> <45CE5846.80002@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 03:41:58PM -0800, Michael wrote: > Erik Trulsson wrote: > >On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 02:06:37PM -0800, Michael wrote: > > > >>Hello everyone, > >> > >>I'm building a production server and I have what may seem to be a very > >>simple question so I hope it only requires a simple answer. > >> > >>As I've studied the FreeBSD Handbook as well as the man pages for this, > >>it's still not clear to me which tag I should use for a production server. > >> > >>For my sources I always use the security branch for the release we are > >>using so that they stay stable and also plug most of the security issues > >>as they arise and so the sources tag is always RELENG_6_2. > >> > >>For the ports, the default tag is always tag=. which I'm not sure is the > >>best thing for a production server since that's the tab for -CURRENT. > >>On one hand it makes sense to track that branch for ports because that's > >>where fixes would go for applications as they find them, but I'm not > >>convinced this is the best thing for a production server and wonder if I > >>should also use the security branch for the ports. > >> > >>My first question is, does any real security fixes go into the ports > >>when you pull from a security branch? In other words, do maintainers > >>actually submit fixes to that branch for the ports? > >> > >>I have a similiar question for the docs as well, should we be tracking > >>only the security branch when using cvsup for sources, ports and doc's? > >> > > > >Neither the ports tree nor the docs tree is branched. I.e. there is no > >security branch for ports. > >On the other hand you are not required to update installed ports/packages > >just because you update the ports tree. > > > > > > > What do you mean they aren't branched? Of course they are or they > wouldn't be in cvs and if I changed the tag, it wouldn't do anything > (they wouldn't change on running cvsup), but they do change (ports get > deleted/added/edited.), so I'm not following you here. > > Can you elaborate on what you mean? What I mean is that the ports tree only has a single CVS branch, HEAD, which is what you get with tag=. There are no other branches. (Unlike the src/ tree which does have several different branches in addition to HEAD.) There are tags (like RELEASE_6_2_0 or RELEASE_5_2_1) that identify the ports tree at some specific point in time. If you update the ports tree with e.g. tag=RELEASE_6_2_0 you will get the ports tree in the same state as was shipped with FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE. If you use the same tag a couple of months later you will get exactly the same thing - the ports tree as was shipped with FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE. If you want to get updates to the ports tree you will have to use tag=. or wait until a new release has been made and use the tag corresponding to that particular release. -- <Insert your favourite quote here.> Erik Trulsson ertr1013@student.uu.se
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070211002949.GA6384>