From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Mar 20 10:05:11 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA14831 for freebsd-stable-outgoing; Fri, 20 Mar 1998 10:05:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from socko.cdnow.com (socko.cdnow.com [209.83.166.75]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA14771 for ; Fri, 20 Mar 1998 10:05:04 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from heller@daria.cdnow.com) Received: from daria.cdnow.com (daria.cdnow.com [209.83.166.60]) by socko.cdnow.com (8.8.6/8.8.6) with ESMTP id NAA24580; Fri, 20 Mar 1998 13:05:02 -0500 (EST) Received: (from heller@localhost) by daria.cdnow.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id NAA05038; Fri, 20 Mar 1998 13:04:45 -0500 (EST) From: "A. Karl Heller" Message-Id: <199803201804.NAA05038@daria.cdnow.com> Subject: Re: after the release ... To: eivind@yes.no (Eivind Eklund) Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 13:04:45 -0500 (EST) Cc: software@kew.com, stable@FreeBSD.ORG Reply-To: heller@cdnow.com In-Reply-To: <19980320104944.02752@follo.net> from "Eivind Eklund" at Mar 20, 98 10:49:44 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk I have to admit that the "patch" facility that Sun uses is rather nice. And I also agree that there are times that I wanted to fix bugs and upgrade certain sections of my system without pulling down the whole system and doing a make world. Don't get me wrong. Make world is a great feature for building an entire system. However, for those systems that are used in "production environments" this behavior is not very satisfying, even if only rebuilding a few apps. A binary patch would be very nice. ( On the flip side, I think Solaris has a lot more bugs than FreeBSD... But that could be only because I don't hear about the FreeBSD ones as much, or the fact that Solaris is running in many more environments.) In any case, some type of patch process would be very nice. I would suggest that it contain both source and binary patches. The installer would figure out if you actually have a source tree, etc.. Replacing the entire binary is probably the way to go. ( Except in cases of custom kernels, you would have to do a source rebuild. ) I'm still running 2.1.7.1 at home and our two FreeBSD boxes here are running 2.2-970801-RELENG. Once they are upgraded to 2.2.6 I probably won't source fix anything until 3.0 is official. I'm concerned about stability here. Karl > [Drew Derbyshire] > > I would suggest after the release a point release method be > > developed to allow (perhaps as a port type package?) The ability to > > download/apply critical fixes quickly. > > > > Simply put, having to track the entire -stable source to get > > bugfixes on the CD-ROM is not desirable. > Good suggestion! Go ahead and do it; I promise to post comments about > your design when you post it, and I'm sure Jordan and Mike will, too. > Quick requirements: > * Full authorization using public key cryptography > * It must be possible to back bad changes out. > * It must verify that the base-version it is upgrading from is correct > That's about it. You'll get extra points for: > * Automatic handling through e-mail > * Using the standard metadata format from the Java JAR files for > authentication > * Being able to apply binary diffs > * Writing this so the code can be re-used by the new package system > * Getting it done so it can ship with 2.2.6-RELEASE. (This gives LOTS > of points, and I'm sure there are several people that'll buy you a > beer for this. I'm one of them :-) > Eivind. > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- A. Karl Heller | It is foolhardy to assume that jiggling X Senior Systems Engineer | will not diddle Y, however unlikely. CDnow Inc. | MSG FROM OPERATOR : http://cdnow.com | OUR HAMSTER IS SICK. SYSTEM SHUTDOWN IMMEDIATELY. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message