On 04/20/16 10:48, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > While number of packages don't see outside internal -- this is > irrelevant. > After possibility of update individual package -- nuber of packages is > impotant. > Take fresh 11.0. Before 11.1 update only kernel. What you system have? > 11.0? 11.1-RC3? How you name it? How identify it for take support on > forum or mail list? > > How name system, updated all w/o compiler? or only some services? > Currently we have simple naming: > > 10.3-RC1, 10.3-RELEASE, 10.3-p7, 10.3-STABLE r123456. > This is shortly and clearly identify system to anyone. > > How do this with many packages?
Hmmm.... Good point. At release time, a set of packages will be generated. These will all have the version number of the release eg. 11.0. That's simple and unambiguous. Subsequently adding patches will add a patch level to the version, so 11.0-p1, 11.0-p2 exactly as now. Only patches that affect the kernel will cause the output of uname(1) to show the new patch level, but updates to user land should be reflected in the output of freebsd-version(1). That's exactly the same as now, and assuming you, as an end user, install the default set of FreeBSD packages and apply all the patches as they come out, then there should be no problem. This implies that /every/ patchset will include an update to the package containing freebsd-version. What packaging base does do is allow you to be selective in the patches you apply. So, for instance if patch -p1 was not relevant to you, you might not install it. So you could end up with a system where you hadn't installed patches -p1 -- -p9 but you did install patch -p10. The freebsd-version(1) output would presumably show the system as 11.0-p10 -- but that's certainly not the same as a system with all of those patches -p1 to -p9 applied. Or you could just install the updated freebsd-version(1) package and have your system blatantly lie about its patching status. So, yes, this does change the meaning of the version number string. It's morally equivalent to tracking the releng/11.0 branch in SVN but compiling your system with various WITH_FOO or WITHOUT_BAR flags, and possible local modifications to the code base to back out certain commits. It's still 11.0-SOMETHING but it's not clear exactly what that something should be. Hopefully people that do such things will be sufficiently technically sophisticated to be able to characterize their problems based on the versions of any relevant FreeBSD packages. On the release of 11.1 there would be a complete new set of system packages generated, and the upgrade process would install the new versions of those packages all round, even if the content of an individual package was identical to the one in 11.0. There's probably a handy optimization where we compare the before and after checksums for package files and don't overwrite on disk what is identical between package versions, but do update all of the bookkeeping in the pkgdb. Cheers, Matthew
Description: OpenPGP digital signature