Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 11:02:16 +0200 From: Stijn Hoop <stijn@win.tue.nl> To: Murray Stokely <murray@freebsd.org> Cc: Sandro Tolaini <sandro@focuseek.com>, Release Engineers <re@freebsd.org>, stable@freebsd.org, vendors@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Status of 4.6.1 Message-ID: <20020801090216.GD46812@pcwin002.win.tue.nl> In-Reply-To: <20020801015544.U9619@freebsdmall.com> References: <XFMail.20020731162333.re@FreeBSD.org> <200208011012.35023.sandro@focuseek.com> <20020801015544.U9619@freebsdmall.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--yNb1oOkm5a9FJOVX Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Murray, On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 01:55:44AM -0700, Murray Stokely wrote: > On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 10:12:34AM +0200, Sandro Tolaini wrote: > > Just a question about ports: I saw that the ports tree has the matching= tag=20 > > for 4.6.1 release at the same revisions of 4.6 (that is, ports bundled = with=20 > > 4.6.1 release CDs will be the same packaged with 4.6). I think that por= ts=20 > > bundled with 4.6.2 should be more recent. >=20 > The RELEASE_4_6_1 tag in /ports is indeed very similar to the > RELEASE_4_6_0 tag. This is necessary because of the huge amount of > effort that portmgr@ and the entire ports team put into doing quality > assurance work in the month leading up to a release. We can not > simply use the current head of the ports/ tree, because many important > packages are not building. It usually takes us WEEKS to get a package > set put together for 4.X where both KDE and GNOME fully build. The > only way we can provide a package set for our 4.6.X point release is > if we base it off of the 4.6 ports tree, with as few modifications as > possible. >=20 > The packages are all being rebuilt on 4.6.2 machines so that they > are linked with the new OpenSSL libraries, etc.. >=20 > You can always see the build logs for the package cluster at > http://bento.FreeBSD.org. You can also read a little about the setup > in the releng-packages article. While I understand about the testing cycle taking weeks, does this mean that the apache/openssl/other vulnerable ports in 4.6-RELEASE are also not updated? I thought one of the goals of the in-between release was to fix these packages. Could you clarify this? --Stijn --=20 Nostalgia ain't what it used to be. --yNb1oOkm5a9FJOVX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE9SPkYY3r/tLQmfWcRAjypAJ9uuZfYNK+gNqfFmZSgBE1aOVIBUwCfQJSh N5/8ITrFkw2WQ1hRGY+JyuQ= =x6OA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --yNb1oOkm5a9FJOVX-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020801090216.GD46812>