On 2021-02-23 19:30, Mark Millard via freebsd-stable wrote:
On 2021-Feb-23, at 18:08, Chris <bsd-lists at BSDforge.com> wrote:
On 2021-02-23 17:42, Mark Millard wrote:
(Warner is only CC'd here.)
Warner Losh imp at bsdimp.com wrote on
Wed Feb 24 01:04:13 UTC 2021 :
On Tue, Feb 23, 2021, 4:51 PM Chris <bsd-lists at bsdforge.com> wrote:
> Given this is a pkg(8) error, I brought it up on ports@
> but it was suggested I (also?) bring it up here on stable@
>
> OK awhile back I installed a copy of 12 stable from the
> usb stick image. I tweaked it to my wishes then got called
> away and haven't been able to get back to it until the other
> day. This is still a fresh install which has a populated /usr/src.
> So I
> svnlite co svn://svn.freebsd.org/ports/head /usr/ports
> followed by a
> cd /usr/ports/ports-mgmt/pkg/ && make install clean
> which returns
> make
> /!\ ERROR: /!\
>
> Ports Collection support for your FreeBSD version has ended, and no ports
> are
> guaranteed to build on this syst
em. Please upgrade to a supported release.
>
> No support will be provided if you silence this message by defining
> ALLOW_UNSUPPORTED_SYSTEM.
>
> *** Error code 1
>
> Stop.
> Err what? Ok while I think this was from stable 12.1, it's still still 12,
> and it's on stable. So what gives?
>
12.1 has reached EOL now that 12.2 has been out a while.
From release/12.1.0/ :
"Tag releng/12.1@r354233 as release/12.1.0 (12.1-RELEASE)"
I think that implicit in Warner's response is that
versions of stable/12/ that are not after r354233 are
also EOL. One needs to have stable/12/ material from
after -r354233 in order for it to be supported.
He might even mean that stable/12/ material from before:
"Tag releng/12.2@r366954 as release/12.2.0 (12.2-RELEASE)"
would also be considered as not supported.
To be safe you should be using stable/12/ material from
on or after -r366954 in order to have a supported
context.
(I'm not sure if anything is explicit about the status
of stable/12/ material between releng/12.1@r354233
and releng/12.2@r366954 .)
A HUGE thanks for all of this, Mark. This is EXACTLY what I needed.
# uname -apKU
FreeBSD fbsd12dev 12.1-STABLE FreeBSD 12.1-STABLE r363918 GENERIC amd64
amd64 1201522 1201522
which pretty well confirms what you deduced.
I'm still a bit confused. It seems to me that it didn't _used_
to be that way. But my brain isn't using ECC. So a couple of
bits may be flipped.
The implication of all of stable/12/ being supported
would be support of stable/12/ from on or after its
creation:
QUOTE
Revision 339434 - Directory Listing
Modified Fri Oct 19 00:09:24 2018 UTC (2 years, 4 months ago) by gjb
Copied from: head revision 339432
Copy head@r339432
to stable/12 as part of the 12.0-RELEASE cycle.
Additional post-branch commits will follow.
END QUOTE
Such does not seem likely to me. What would be the
point of dropping 12.0-RELEASE support and
12.1-RELEASE support if such stable/12/ history was
covered, some of that history being minor variations
on the 12.0-RELEASE or 12.1-RELEASE ?
Note:
Despite some claims in other messages, svn -r363918
is not 12.1-RELEASE ( not -r354233 ) and -r363918
is shown as (only) in stable/12/ by svn. Your
claim of 12-STABLE was correct, just not detailed
enough.
Thanks. I really appreciate your taking the time to
clear things up for me. It also seems clear that I've
somehow mixed the purpose of RELEASE vs STABLE. :-/
Thanks again, Mark!
--Chris
===
Mark Millard
marklmi at yahoo.com
( dsl-only.net went
away in early 2018-Mar)
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
