Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 10:15:32 +0200 From: Kurt Jaeger <lists@opsec.eu> To: Aristedes Maniatis <ari@ish.com.au> Cc: freebsd-stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: ABI changes within stable branch Message-ID: <20170919081532.GB2170@home.opsec.eu> In-Reply-To: <1b07bf49-508a-c6b4-e805-df7d43230f81@ish.com.au> References: <1b07bf49-508a-c6b4-e805-df7d43230f81@ish.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi! > Now that we are on a faster upgrade policy for minor branches, it is expected that we'll upgrade from 11.0 to 11.1 to 11.2 much faster than in the old days. I can cope with that, but it appears that functional changes are also being made within the stable branch as seen here: > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221672 > > A new fdatasync() method is available in 11.1 but not in 11.0 which means that I now need to maintain separate ports trees for each minor update. I've never done this before, assuming (correctly for me until now) that all ports build on the latest minor release within the stable branch would work on older releases until I was ready to upgrade them. I think it was the other way around: All ports build on the .0 of a RELEASE work on all later .x of that RELEASE. Which makes it a bit difficult, if a .0 is no longer supported/patched by the secteam. A pointer to the official policy would be nice 8-} -- pi@opsec.eu +49 171 3101372 3 years to go !
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20170919081532.GB2170>