On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 04:29:48PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Thanks much for the hints. After going through the explanations of the > FreeBSD handbook ("difference between STABLE and CURRENT") one more > time, re-reading your email there are some questions remaining - maybe > you could comment on this just to make things clear: > > When I installed 4.9 from the CD (originally .iso pulled down from > freebsd.org) this was 4.9-STABLE (i.e. 4.9-RELEASE as it was an > official release)?
If you installed from an official release .iso then you'll have got 4.9-RELEASE. This is actually just a point-in-time from the 4-STABLE branch, after the release engineering team has put a temporary block on the usual development activities and spent a good few weeks testing things and fixing up various bug reports and so forth. However, as part of the process of making the release, a new branch is made for the 4.9-RELEASE code, and only critical security fixes get committed to that release branch. Post release the 4-STABLE branch carries on with the usual development activities. > When doing a CVS-upgrade on this installation with "stable-supfile" I > get any "feature-enhancements"/program upgrades in the 4.9 line plus > any bug fixes on 4.9? Yes -- 4-STABLE gets all of the security fixes, plus updates to the system (including upgrades to contributed software like sendmail(8)), new features, support for some new hardware and so forth. These updates are meant to be tested in the bleeding edge development environment a.k.a 5-CURRENT so that there's some assurance they're going to work well in 4-STABLE. However, the 4.x series of releases has actually lasted as -STABLE a lot longer than the equivalent for any of the other major version numbers. Consequently the gap between 4.x and 5.x is quite large and MFC'ing (Merge From Current) is not necessarily as simple as it might be in all areas of the system. > But how - if at all - does "CURRENT" come in? Or does "CURRENT" wrt my > installed 4.9 only relate to 5.x? CURRENT is the bleeding edge development environment. You're not expected to run -CURRENT unless you're capable of serious system programming type activities. Indeed, there's no guarrantee that -CURRENT will actually compile and boot at any particular point in time. Yes, -CURRENT implies 5.x at the moment: generally there will be -STABLE and -RELEASEs with major version number N and -CURRENT with version (N+1). However, it's quite an unusual situation at the moment with several "New Technology" releases being made from the -CURRENT branch. Normality is planned to be restored with the release of 5.3 around March next year, when the 5-STABLE and 6-CURRENT branches will be created. Around that point 4-STABLE will cease to attract much in the way of development activity, and all activity will gradually cease, as it has on the 3-STABLE and 2-STABLE branches. There may be another 4.x-RELEASE before that point, but that's not definite. It will probably be labelled 4.9.1-RELEASE and consist of wrapping up any loose ends and drawing a line under the 4.x series of releases. > (Sorry if these questions sound dumb, but I didn't find any > comprehensive explanation about the differences between > stable/current/release/standard) This is all documented on the http://www.freebsd.org/ site and it's been discussed ad nauseam on various mailing lists. Try reading the 'Release Engineering' pages http://www.freebsd.org/releng/index.html and the links accessible from there. Cheers, Matthew  Actually the -CURRENT branch isn't so much a branch, as the main stem from which all other branches ultimately spring. Thus it is labelled 'HEAD' in most of the documentation, and you use the '.' tag in cvsup to retrieve those sources. All part of the fun of using cvs(1). -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 26 The Paddocks Savill Way PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Marlow Tel: +44 1628 476614 Bucks., SL7 1TH UK
Description: PGP signature