RE: Ports upgrade policy

[Jud]

On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 08:35:46 -0600, "Mike Loiterman"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Erik Trulsson  wrote:
[snip]
> >>> Is it advisable to sync my source to RELEASE, but to CURRENT for
> >>> ports? Typically, I upgade my ports a few days after they get
> >>> updated so I'm always running the latest version, but would it be
> >>> better to sync both ports and source to RELEASE? 
[snip]
> > Ports *are* tagged for each release, but they are not branched.
> 
> Yes, I know, which is why I asked the question...which is better?

Considerations I can think of -

(1) Advantage of using -HEAD (-CURRENT): Updates to ports may include
security fixes.

(2) Disadvantage of using -HEAD (-CURRENT): It is possible, though
perhaps not likely, that an updated port would require something your
-RELEASE base system lacked.

Jud
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: Ports upgrade policy

[Bob Johnson]

On 3/14/06, Mike Loiterman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Erik Trulsson  wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 04:18:13AM -0400, Duane Whitty wrote:
> >> Mike Loiterman wrote:
> >>> Is it advisable to sync my source to RELEASE, but to CURRENT for
> >>> ports? Typically, I upgade my ports a few days after they get
> >>> updated so I'm always running the latest version, but would it be
> >>> better to sync both ports and source to RELEASE?
> >>>
> >> It would be nice I guess if ports were tagged like src but they are
> >> not. Basically HEAD is all there is vis-a-vis tags.  You can specify
> >> a specific date however.
> >
> > Ports *are* tagged for each release, but they are not branched.
>
> Yes, I know, which is why I asked the question...which is better?

As I understand it, release tagsare static.  If you specify a release
tag, you get the ports as they were at the time of that release. 
Ports don't branch with releases, so if you want updated ports, you
use "tag=."


- Bob
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

RE: Ports upgrade policy

[Mike Loiterman]

Erik Trulsson  wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 04:18:13AM -0400, Duane Whitty wrote:
>> Mike Loiterman wrote:
>>> This is my supfile:
>>> 
>>> *default  host=cvsup1.FreeBSD.org
>>> *default  base=/usr
>>> *default  prefix=/usr
>>> *default  release=cvs
>>> *default  tag=RELENG_6_0
>>> *default  delete use-rel-suffix
>>> 
>>> src-all
>>> 
>>> *default tag=.
>>> ports-all
>>> doc-all
>>> 
>>> I have been using it like this for years, obviously changing to the
>>> latest release tag.  I haven't had problem and I'm not having
>>> problems, but my question is this: 
>>> 
>>> Is it advisable to sync my source to RELEASE, but to CURRENT for
>>> ports? Typically, I upgade my ports a few days after they get
>>> updated so I'm always running the latest version, but would it be
>>> better to sync both ports and source to RELEASE? 
>>> 
>> Hi Mike,
>> 
>> It would be nice I guess if ports were tagged like src but they are
>> not. Basically HEAD is all there is vis-a-vis tags.  You can specify
>> a specific date however.
> 
> Ports *are* tagged for each release, but they are not branched.

Yes, I know, which is why I asked the question...which is better?

--
Mike Loiterman
grantADLER
Tel: 630-302-4944
Fax: 773-442-0992
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP Key: 0xD1B9D18E

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: Ports upgrade policy

[Erik Trulsson]

On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 04:18:13AM -0400, Duane Whitty wrote:
> Mike Loiterman wrote:
> >This is my supfile:
> >
> >*default  host=cvsup1.FreeBSD.org
> >*default  base=/usr
> >*default  prefix=/usr
> >*default  release=cvs
> >*default  tag=RELENG_6_0
> >*default  delete use-rel-suffix
> >
> >src-all
> >
> >*default tag=.
> >ports-all
> >doc-all
> >
> >I have been using it like this for years, obviously changing to the latest
> >release tag.  I haven't had problem and I'm not having problems, but my
> >question is this:
> >
> >Is it advisable to sync my source to RELEASE, but to CURRENT for ports?
> >Typically, I upgade my ports a few days after they get updated so I'm 
> >always
> >running the latest version, but would it be better to sync both ports and
> >source to RELEASE?
> >  
> Hi Mike,
> 
> It would be nice I guess if ports were tagged like src but they are not.
> Basically HEAD is all there is vis-a-vis tags.  You can specify a
> specific date however.

Ports *are* tagged for each release, but they are not branched.


> 
> Duane
> >Obviously, it depends, somewhat, on personal choice, but in terms of
> >stablity and "correctness" which is better?
> >

-- 

Erik Trulsson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: Ports upgrade policy

[Duane Whitty]

Mike Loiterman wrote:

This is my supfile:

*default  host=cvsup1.FreeBSD.org
*default  base=/usr
*default  prefix=/usr
*default  release=cvs
*default  tag=RELENG_6_0
*default  delete use-rel-suffix

src-all

*default tag=.
ports-all
doc-all

I have been using it like this for years, obviously changing to the latest
release tag.  I haven't had problem and I'm not having problems, but my
question is this:

Is it advisable to sync my source to RELEASE, but to CURRENT for ports?
Typically, I upgade my ports a few days after they get updated so I'm always
running the latest version, but would it be better to sync both ports and
source to RELEASE?
  

Hi Mike,

It would be nice I guess if ports were tagged like src but they are not.
Basically HEAD is all there is vis-a-vis tags.  You can specify a
specific date however.

Duane

Obviously, it depends, somewhat, on personal choice, but in terms of
stablity and "correctness" which is better?

--
Mike Loiterman
grantADLER
Tel: 630-302-4944
Fax: 773-442-0992
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP Key: 0xD1B9D18E

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"



  

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Ports upgrade policy

[Mike Loiterman]

This is my supfile:

*default  host=cvsup1.FreeBSD.org
*default  base=/usr
*default  prefix=/usr
*default  release=cvs
*default  tag=RELENG_6_0
*default  delete use-rel-suffix

src-all

*default tag=.
ports-all
doc-all

I have been using it like this for years, obviously changing to the latest
release tag.  I haven't had problem and I'm not having problems, but my
question is this:

Is it advisable to sync my source to RELEASE, but to CURRENT for ports?
Typically, I upgade my ports a few days after they get updated so I'm always
running the latest version, but would it be better to sync both ports and
source to RELEASE?

Obviously, it depends, somewhat, on personal choice, but in terms of
stablity and "correctness" which is better?

--
Mike Loiterman
grantADLER
Tel: 630-302-4944
Fax: 773-442-0992
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP Key: 0xD1B9D18E

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"