From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 22 20:57:38 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7383D16A41F; Thu, 22 Dec 2005 20:57:38 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jrhett@mail.meer.net) Received: from outbound0.sv.meer.net (outbound0.sv.meer.net [205.217.152.13]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 040C543D5A; Thu, 22 Dec 2005 20:57:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jrhett@mail.meer.net) Received: from mail.meer.net (mail.meer.net [209.157.152.14]) by outbound0.sv.meer.net (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id jBMKvaQL080636; Thu, 22 Dec 2005 12:57:36 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jrhett@mail.meer.net) Received: from mail.meer.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.meer.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/meer) with ESMTP id jBMKvRTx042654; Thu, 22 Dec 2005 12:57:27 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jrhett@mail.meer.net) Received: (from jrhett@localhost) by mail.meer.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) id jBMKvPc2042652; Thu, 22 Dec 2005 12:57:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jrhett) Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 12:57:25 -0800 From: Jo Rhett To: Chuck Swiger Message-ID: <20051222205725.GD39174@svcolo.com> References: <43A266E5.3080103@samsco.org> <20051217220021.GB93998@svcolo.com> <43A4A557.3010600@mac.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <43A4A557.3010600@mac.com> Organization: svcolo.com User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 21:09:21 +0000 Cc: stable@freebsd.org, current Subject: Re: Fast releases demand binary updates.. (Was: Release schedule for 2006) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 20:57:38 -0000 On Sat, Dec 17, 2005 at 06:55:03PM -0500, Chuck Swiger wrote: > YMMV. I burned a 6.0 release from the ISO image, and did a binary upgrade on an > IBM ThinkPad (T.34? maybe), which worked perfectly. All of the 5.x binaries, > including X11, KDE, printing, Mozilla, etc worked just fine. There are no ISO for patch releases. And taking systems offline for a .1 update gets annoying fast. Dealing with all the file comparisons which are exactly the same except for the CVS tag takes hours for no good reason. Multiple many hours by hundreds of systems, and you could easily have a full time person just doing FreeBSD upgrades. > Upgrading the ports from there was somewhat annoying I don't care about ports, just the base OS. Ports we've built the infrastructure to handle properly, and very few ports are installed on production systems. > Now, if you want to talk about upgrading to intermediate patch releases, you've > got a valid point there. :-) That is exactly the point. Both .01 and .1 releases are annoying. -- Jo Rhett senior geek SVcolo : Silicon Valley Colocation