Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 16:45:09 -0500 From: Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> To: Jo Rhett <jrhett@svcolo.com> Cc: stable@freebsd.org, current <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Fast releases demand binary updates.. (Was: Release schedule for 2006) Message-ID: <43AB1E65.2030501@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <20051222205725.GD39174@svcolo.com> References: <43A266E5.3080103@samsco.org> <20051217220021.GB93998@svcolo.com> <43A4A557.3010600@mac.com> <20051222205725.GD39174@svcolo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jo Rhett wrote: > 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. FreeBSD releases new .ISO images several times a year, but you've got the tools to make .ISO images of patch releases yourself, if you want to. I don't think that the FreeBSD project can shorten the release cycle below a month or so, which means that patch releases are always going to be on the (b)leading edge... > 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. Using a build server as a testbed and to generate new packages or even a new kernel + world will reduce the amount of work required, but FreeBSD does require some level of administration and maintenance. >> 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. I've got firewalls with a single-digit number of ports installed, but anything else seems to acquire 100-200 or so. >> 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. I'm with you on this, but suggesting solutions is more useful than just noting the existence of problems. -- -Chuck
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43AB1E65.2030501>