Stable vs Release vs Current
David Beukes
Have been using FreeBSD for about a year now but haven't
understood or found a definitive answer to the
versions/branches. Would appreciate it if someone could
shed some light; a bit of history follows:
I installed 1st FreeBSD system from 4.4 (the only cds I
could get my hands on). By the time I started understanding
what I was doing, 4.8 was out. So I CVSup'd the source and
did the whole make buildworld/installworld kernel thing.
And I was running 4.8... Question here is, was I running
4.4 release? or 4.4 stable? when did 4.8 become stable (are
you starting to catch my drift?).
Then in December 2003 (about a month after 4.9 was
announced), I downloaded ISOs for 4.9 and reinstalled from
scratch. Same questions as before, am I running 4.9 stable?
release? When did release become stable?
Am now running 4.9 and started cvsupping the source. my
supfile has this line in it: default release=cvs
tag=RELENG_4_9. Am I wasting my time? Should it rather read
RELENG_4? If so, why?
And where do security patches fit into this story?
Any info would be helpful.
Thanks,
David
_______________________________________________
freebsd...@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stabl...@freebsd.org"
Matt Douhan
-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
>Från: owner-free...@freebsd.org
>[mailto:owner-free...@freebsd.org]För David Beukes
>Am now running 4.9 and started cvsupping the source. my
>supfile has this line in it: default release=cvs
>tag=RELENG_4_9. Am I wasting my time? Should it rather read
>RELENG_4? If so, why?
>
>And where do security patches fit into this story?
This might help
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/releng/index.html
or possibly
http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.2R/early-adopter.html
I hope this helps
regards
Matt
Mike
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/current-stable.html
Release Documentation:
http://www.freebsd.org/relnotes.html
That should clear it up for you.
-Mike
--------------------------------------
"Hard Work Often Pays Off After Time,
but Laziness Always Pays Off Now."
Erik Trulsson
> Hi,
>
> Have been using FreeBSD for about a year now but haven't
> understood or found a definitive answer to the
> versions/branches. Would appreciate it if someone could
> shed some light; a bit of history follows:
>
> I installed 1st FreeBSD system from 4.4 (the only cds I
> could get my hands on). By the time I started understanding
> what I was doing, 4.8 was out. So I CVSup'd the source and
> did the whole make buildworld/installworld kernel thing.
> And I was running 4.8... Question here is, was I running
> 4.4 release? or 4.4 stable? when did 4.8 become stable (are
> you starting to catch my drift?).
>
> Then in December 2003 (about a month after 4.9 was
> announced), I downloaded ISOs for 4.9 and reinstalled from
> scratch. Same questions as before, am I running 4.9 stable?
> release? When did release become stable?
>
> Am now running 4.9 and started cvsupping the source. my
> supfile has this line in it: default release=cvs
> tag=RELENG_4_9. Am I wasting my time? Should it rather read
> RELENG_4? If so, why?
>
> And where do security patches fit into this story?
>
> Any info would be helpful.
All the 4.x releases are essentially snapshots of the RELENG_4
development branch.
4.4-STABLE refers to the RELENG_4 branch at any time after 4.4-RELEASE
was created, but before 4.5-RELEASE was created. (And by the same
reasoning 4.8-STABLE refers to the RELENG_4 branch between 4.8-RELEASE
and 4.9-RELEASE.)
If you install from a CD you will get 4.x-RELEASE.
If you cvsup from the RELENG_4 branch you will get 4.x-STABLE, where
4.x is the most recent release. (You could also use cvsup to get some
particular release if you wish, but that is rarely done.)
If you should use RELENG_4_9 or RELENG_4 is a matter of taste.
RELENG_4_9 is 4.9-RELEASE+security fixes only, and is therefore much
less likely to introduce new bugs than the RELENG_4 branch, but you
won't get any new features or non-critical bug fixes on the other hand.
For more information you could read the following texts which should
answer most of your questions:
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/current-stable.html
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/cvs-tags.html
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/faq/admin.html#RELEASE-CANDIDATE
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/releng/index.html
http://www.freebsd.org/security/index.html#adv
--
<Insert your favourite quote here.>
Erik Trulsson
ertr...@student.uu.se
Rob B
>Hi,
>
>Have been using FreeBSD for about a year now but haven't
>understood or found a definitive answer to the
>versions/branches. Would appreciate it if someone could
>shed some light; a bit of history follows:
>
>I installed 1st FreeBSD system from 4.4 (the only cds I
>could get my hands on). By the time I started understanding
>what I was doing, 4.8 was out. So I CVSup'd the source and
>did the whole make buildworld/installworld kernel thing.
>And I was running 4.8... Question here is, was I running
>4.4 release? or 4.4 stable? when did 4.8 become stable (are
>you starting to catch my drift?).
4.4-RELEASE is just 4.4-STABLE at one particular point in time
>Then in December 2003 (about a month after 4.9 was
>announced), I downloaded ISOs for 4.9 and reinstalled from
>scratch. Same questions as before, am I running 4.9 stable?
>release? When did release become stable?
-STABLE becomes -RELEASE when the source tree is tagged with -RELEASE
>Am now running 4.9 and started cvsupping the source. my
>supfile has this line in it: default release=cvs
>tag=RELENG_4_9. Am I wasting my time? Should it rather read
>RELENG_4? If so, why?
That all depends if you want to follow -RELEASE plus security fixes, or if
you want a (slowly) moving target that is -STABLE
>And where do security patches fit into this story?
See above
>Any info would be helpful.
I suggest re-reading the Handbook, the section on Stable vs Current
(http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/current-stable.html)
is most pertinant.
Cheers,
Rob
--
"Beer. Now there's a temporary solution."
- Homer Simpson
This is random quote 9 of 1254.
Distance from the centre of the brewing universe
[15200.8 km (8207.8 mi), 262.8 deg](Apparent) Rennerian
Public Key fingerprint = 6219 33BD A37B 368D 29F5 19FB 945D C4D7 1F66 D9C5
Mark Foster
> Am now running 4.9 and started cvsupping the source. my
> supfile has this line in it: default release=cvs
> tag=RELENG_4_9. Am I wasting my time? Should it rather read
> RELENG_4? If so, why?
If you want to track the security branch for RELEASE 4.9 use RELENG_4_9
Otherwise use RELENG_4 which means tracking STABLE.
> And where do security patches fit into this story?
See above.
> Any info would be helpful.
Go read
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/releng/article.html
Then if you still have questions, ask again.
--
Some days it's just not worth chewing through the restraints...
Mark Foster <ma...@foster.cc> http://mark.foster.cc/
Freddie Cash
> understood or found a definitive answer to the
> versions/branches. Would appreciate it if someone could
> shed some light; a bit of history follows:
There are two development branches for FreeBSD: -CURRENT and -STABLE.
-CURRENT is where the majority of all new development it done. This
development branch is what the next major release of FreeBSD will be
from. Right now, -CURRENT is what will become FreeBSD 5.x. The
cvs/cvsup tag for this is a period ".".
-STABLE is the everyday, production-quality development branch. New
technology is tested in -CURRENT, then ported over to -STABLE as
needed. Some new development occurs in this branch, but it's not a
common thing. Right now, -STABLE is FreeBSD 4.x. The cvs/cvsup tag
for this iis RELENG_4.
A release is nothing more than a snapshot taken from either of the
branches, put through some testing, deemed good enough for use, and
released to the world. Right now, a release can come from either
branch. The latest releases are 4.9 and 5.2.
When you installed 4.4, you were running 4.4-RELEASE. When you
upgraded to 4.8, you were running 4.8-RELEASE. And when you upgrade
to 4.9, you will be running 4.9-RELEASE.
After each release, a new branch is created to hold just security
fixes for that release. This is known as the RELENG_X_Y branch, where
X is the major version number, and Y is the minor version number. For
instance, there is a RELENG_4_7 for security fixes to 4.7-RELEASE,
there is a RELENG_4_8 for security fixes to 4.8-RELEASE, and there is
a RELENG_4_9 for security fixes to 4.9-RELEASE.
Dave Tweten
>Have been using FreeBSD for about a year now but haven't understood or
>found a definitive answer to the versions/branches.
CURRENT --> the CVS tree to which developers submit their unit-tested code.
Currently, this tree produces releases numbered 5.x. This has the
latest stuff, and is flakier than the alternative, ...
STABLE --> the CVS tree to which code is submitted (MFC'ed) when it has
proven itself for some time under CURRENT. Currently, this tree
produces releases numbered 4.x.
Release --> a term that is applied to verious (numbered) versions from
each CVS tree. The current 4.9-Release is a snapshot of the STABLE
tree's continuous progression just before the most recent
pre-release
code freeze thawed.
Release Candidate --> Characterizes versions of CURRENT or STABLE during
a pre-release code freeze that are being considered to be declared
the Release.
tag=RELENG_5 --> This is how to get cvsup to give you the absolutely
latest,
up-to-the-minute, flakiest CURRENT.
tag=RELENG_4 --> This is how to get cvsup to give you the absolutely
latest,
up-to-the-minute, (probably not too flaky unless we're in a code
freeze) STABLE. Unless we're in a code freeze, it will call itself
4.x-STABLE. In a code freeze, it might call itself 4.(x+1)-RC,
"RC"
for Release Candidate.
tag=RELENG_4_9 --> This is how to get cvsup to give you the 4.9 Release
code
with only a few, very important bug fixes added. Those fixes are
likely to address only security problems or catastrophic bugs in
the
release.
>I installed 1st FreeBSD system from 4.4 (the only cds I could get my hands
>on). By the time I started understanding what I was doing, 4.8 was out. So
>I CVSup'd the source and did the whole make buildworld/installworld kernel
>thing. And I was running 4.8... Question here is, was I running 4.4
>release?
You don't say what tag you were using, but assuming your tag was
"RELENG_4," you were running 4.8-STABLE. After you cvsupped 4.8-Stable
and installed, 4.4-Release was overwritten.
>Then in December 2003 (about a month after 4.9 was announced), I
>downloaded ISOs for 4.9 and reinstalled from scratch. Same questions as
>before, am I running 4.9 stable? release?
4.9-Release.
>When did release become stable?
It didn't. STABLE became Release just long enough to make the ISOs, and
then went back to being STABLE.
>Am now running 4.9 and started cvsupping the source. my supfile has this
>line in it: default release=cvs tag=RELENG_4_9. Am I wasting my time?
>Should it rather read RELENG_4?
That would depend upon what you want. If you are very conservative and
only want updates beyond 4.9 Release that fix security vulnerabilities or
catastrophic problems, you have just the right tag. If you also want well
tested new features and fixes to less than catastrophic bugs, then you
might want to get RELENG_4 instead. But don't forget to hold off updates
from the pre-release code freeze until the release CDs arrive in the mail.
>And where do security patches fit into this story?
They fit into tag=RELENG_x_y, tag-RELENG_4_9, in your case.
--
M/S 258-5 |1024-bit PGP fingerprint:|twe...@nas.nasa.gov
NASA Ames Research Center | 41 B0 89 0A 8F 94 6C 59| (650) 604-4416
Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000| 7C 80 10 20 25 C7 2F E6|FAX: (650) 604-4377
Not an official NASA position. You can't even be certain who sent this!
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Dave Tweten <twe...@nas.nasa.gov> wrote:
DT> tag=RELENG_5 --> This is how to get cvsup to give you the absolutely
DT> latest, up-to-the-minute, flakiest CURRENT.
This one (and only this one) is wrong - tag=RELENG_5 will currently
empty your source tree. Soon (hopefully) it will produce 5-STABLE and current
will be labelled 6.x - at that point there will be *two* active stable
branches - the older one may be more stable and the newer will be more
featurefull, eventually the older one will have no advantages and will
die off.
Oh yes - the one for the latest, up-to-the-minute, flakiest* CURRENT
is tag=. the same as you always need for the ports.
* probably not the flakiest - for that you probably want tag=ALPHA_2_0 :)
--
C:>WIN | Directable Mirrors
The computer obeys and wins. |A Better Way To Focus The Sun
You lose and Bill collects. | licenses available - see:
| http://www.sohara.org/
Dave Tweten
>This one (and only this one) is wrong - tag=RELENG_5 will currently empty
>your source tree.
Oops. Don't ever use it. Should probably have kept my mouth shut.
Thanks for the correction.
--
M/S 258-5 |1024-bit PGP fingerprint:|twe...@nas.nasa.gov
NASA Ames Research Center | 41 B0 89 0A 8F 94 6C 59| (650) 604-4416
Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000| 7C 80 10 20 25 C7 2F E6|FAX: (650) 604-4377
Not an official NASA position. You can't even be certain who sent this!