Karel Kulhavy wrote on Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 09:04:50PM +0100:
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 01:33:36PM +0100, Vincent GROSS wrote:
 
>> ok, I'll try to be clear :
[...]
>> so, in term of patching,
>> release + errata = stable     and
>> release < stable < current
> 
> Thanks, this is a much better explanation than in FAQ sec. 5.

Except that it is not true.
  release < release+errata < stable < current
would be nearer the mark.

>From http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq5.html#Flavors:
:: The -stable branch is -release plus patches found on the errata page,
:: and some simple fixes that do not merit an errata entry.

> The explanation in FAQ doesn't mention the fact that not only the
> -current, but also the -stable is a moving target, though a slowly
> moving one.

>From http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq5.html#Flavors:
:: -Stable is based on -release, and is a branch from the main development
:: path of OpenBSD.  When very important fixes are made to -current, they
:: are "back ported" (merged) into the -stable branches [...]

As fixes are merged into -stable, it cannot possibly be a static target.

> Now I have 4.0-release and want to have a fixed kernel (4.0-stable).
> Which version of sources should I download then? 4.0-release or 4.0-stable?

You never need to download -release.  -Release is what you have on your
CDs, anyway.

You still seem quite confused.  If all you intend to do is to patch one
single system, i would say the easiest and safest way will be to use
release+errata.  Install the -release sources from CD, download
the patches from the errata page, follow the instructions inside the
patches closely (don't try any clever tricks while you are about it)
are you are done.  I think most beginners will find it easier to get
errata patches applied correctly than to manage the whole make build
process explained in release(8).  Ok, it's a matter of taste, too.

Besides, you might wish to take the time to re-read the FAQ
occasionally.  Some things do tend to get overlooked the first
time, and some things will be understood better with a bit more
hands-on experience.

Reply via email to