Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2008 11:45:34 +0200 From: "Patrick M. Hausen" <hausen@punkt.de> To: Jo Rhett <jrhett@netconsonance.com> Cc: FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: challenge: end of life for 6.2 is premature with buggy 6.3 Message-ID: <20080608094534.GA58022@hugo10.ka.punkt.de> In-Reply-To: <4004D1C8-58E4-46E7-B735-4F1CDC5BCCB4@netconsonance.com> References: <48472CCF.8080101@FreeBSD.org> <4847EF62.1070709@rxsec.com> <4847F814.10409@FreeBSD.org> <4847FB1D.1050400@rxsec.com> <4847FFDE.8000209@FreeBSD.org> <48480473.3010009@rxsec.com> <484808B8.8070506@FreeBSD.org> <5CCF0D6E-56C1-4EBD-B8A6-955311F7851E@netconsonance.com> <20080607204408.GA39103@hugo10.ka.punkt.de> <4004D1C8-58E4-46E7-B735-4F1CDC5BCCB4@netconsonance.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello, On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 03:11:42PM -0700, Jo Rhett wrote: > On Jun 7, 2008, at 1:44 PM, Patrick M. Hausen wrote: >> Upgrading your systems to 6.3 takes _precisely_ the same amount >> of work as upgrading to "6-STABLE as of today 00:00 GMT". > > No, it doesn't. You can get to 6.3 with freebsd-update. And you can stay > patched with freebsd-update on a -RELEASE. For a corporation to choose to > stick with -RELEASE makes perfect sense, and it specifically what the > -RELEASE versions were intended for. Correct, that's why we are running RELENG_6_3 on ~40 machines. >> People who have issues with RELENG_6_3 should upgrade to RELENG_6 >> which is perfectly supported. > > I'm sorry, but you clearly don't run RELENG_6 on anything. I run it on two > home computers, and grabbing it on any given day and trying to run with it > in production is insanity. That's not true. I'm running FreeBSD since 1994 and I've run RELENG_N in production at various stages including N = 3, 4, 5 and 6. > Lots and lots of things are committed, > reverted, recommitted, reverted and then finally redesigned. Each of those > steps are often committed to the source tree. Big changes that affect various parts of the system are announced by HEADS UP messages on the -stable mainling list. And by naming "today 00:00" I did not mean to suggest an _arbitrary_ state of the source tree but one you are to _pick_ based on commits and mailing list information. For example, when Jack comitted his fixes for em(4), we set the checkout date to just past he did precisely that. cvsup, make world, reboot, test (!), rollout ... I have never ever had a single problem caused by running RELENG_N. We changed that only because as the number of machines increases it pays to run the same software on all of them, and "RELEASE" provides a convenient (!) reference point for that. Yet, if I were affected by a particular bug in RELENG_6_3, I would simply pick my own later reference point at which the bug is fixed. Kind regards, Patrick -- punkt.de GmbH * Kaiserallee 13a * 76133 Karlsruhe Tel. 0721 9109 0 * Fax 0721 9109 100 info@punkt.de http://www.punkt.de Gf: Jürgen Egeling AG Mannheim 108285
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080608094534.GA58022>