Re: ABI changes within stable branch

2017-09-25 Thread Patrick M. Hausen
Morning, > Am 20.09.2017 um 19:27 schrieb Mark Linimon : > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 10:15:32AM +0200, Kurt Jaeger wrote: >> A pointer to the official policy would be nice 8-} > > 3rd paragraph of: > > http://www.freebsd.org/portmgr/policies_eol.html One comment: it's

Re: ABI changes within stable branch

2017-09-20 Thread Mark Linimon
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 07:33:20PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote: > FreeBSD has always had a policy of backwards compatibility. By that > definition we are stable. What we don't promise is full forwards > compatibility, which is what you are asking for. In particular, "we add things to the ABI"

Re: ABI changes within stable branch

2017-09-20 Thread Mark Linimon
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 10:15:32AM +0200, Kurt Jaeger wrote: > A pointer to the official policy would be nice 8-} 3rd paragraph of: http://www.freebsd.org/portmgr/policies_eol.html mcl ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list

Re: ABI changes within stable branch

2017-09-20 Thread Patrick M. Hausen
Hi! > Am 20.09.2017 um 04:09 schrieb Aristedes Maniatis : > At the very least I need to remember to keep poudriere on the x.0 release > even after it is EOL, > until every one of my servers has been upgraded Not necessarily. You can run build jails with lower OS versions on an

Re: ABI changes within stable branch

2017-09-19 Thread Aristedes Maniatis
On 20/9/17 11:33AM, Warner Losh wrote: > FreeBSD has always had a policy of backwards compatibility. By that > definition we are stable. What we don't promise is full forwards > compatibility, which is what you are asking for.  Correct. Within the stable branch I'd always assumed forward

Re: ABI changes within stable branch

2017-09-19 Thread Warner Losh
On Sep 19, 2017 6:05 PM, "Aristedes Maniatis" wrote: Matthew Seaman wrote: > > Ports are still being built according to the same policy -- on the > earliest still-supported release of each major branch. > > It's just that now, for 11.x and subsequent, 11.0 goes out of support a

Re: ABI changes within stable branch

2017-09-19 Thread Aristedes Maniatis
Matthew Seaman wrote: > > Ports are still being built according to the same policy -- on the > earliest still-supported release of each major branch. > > It's just that now, for 11.x and subsequent, 11.0 goes out of support a > month or so after 11.1-RELEASE comes out. You're meant to have

Re: ABI changes within stable branch

2017-09-19 Thread Patrick M. Hausen
Hi all, > Am 19.09.2017 um 10:32 schrieb Aristedes Maniatis : > Then we have a problem since > https://pkg.freebsd.org/freebsd:11:x86:64/latest/All/ has been built on 11.1, > not on 11.0 (I just tested it with csync2 which I know fails). Packages there > may fail to run on

Re: ABI changes within stable branch

2017-09-19 Thread Matthew Seaman
On 19/09/2017 09:32, Aristedes Maniatis wrote: > On 19/9/17 6:15PM, Kurt Jaeger wrote: >> 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

Re: ABI changes within stable branch

2017-09-19 Thread Aristedes Maniatis
On 19/9/17 6:15PM, Kurt Jaeger wrote: > 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

Re: ABI changes within stable branch

2017-09-19 Thread Kurt Jaeger
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: > >