From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 17 15:29:30 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7504716A400 for ; Thu, 17 May 2007 15:29:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xfb52@dial.pipex.com) Received: from smtp-out5.blueyonder.co.uk (smtp-out5.blueyonder.co.uk [195.188.213.8]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F1BA13C43E for ; Thu, 17 May 2007 15:29:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xfb52@dial.pipex.com) Received: from [172.23.170.145] (helo=anti-virus03-08) by smtp-out5.blueyonder.co.uk with smtp (Exim 4.52) id 1Hohuy-0005dP-RY; Thu, 17 May 2007 16:29:28 +0100 Received: from [62.31.10.181] (helo=[192.168.23.2]) by asmtp-out2.blueyonder.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1Hohut-0006we-FO; Thu, 17 May 2007 16:29:23 +0100 Message-ID: <464C74D3.7070308@dial.pipex.com> Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 16:29:23 +0100 From: Alex Zbyslaw User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-GB; rv:1.7.13) Gecko/20061205 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Falanga References: <340a29540705170804r51e4d073w9da7eaf9203e85bd@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <340a29540705170804r51e4d073w9da7eaf9203e85bd@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions Subject: Re: A little bit of help understanding CVS and cvsup X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 15:29:30 -0000 Andrew Falanga wrote: > Hi, > > This question probably hasn't much to do with CVS directly but using > cvsup. I want/need to update a 6.0-RELEASE system. However, this > system has some critical data on it and I'd rather not move to code > that is perhaps experimental or "bleeding-edge" technology. I see in > /usr/share/examples/cvsup several supfiles named various things. I > see from the handbook that standard-supfile applies to, what seems > like, the bleeding-edge and the stable-supfile is what I'm looking for > .. yes? > > How do I ensure I update the sources to the most current, STABLE, branch? You can find a description of release tags in the handbook. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/cvs-tags.html and also a description of -STABLE and -CURRENT http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/current-stable.html. Later bits in that section also describe the update procedure *even if you are updating to a RELEASE./RELENG rather then CURRENT or STABLE*. A brief description of the strings in tags is a follows: CURRENT == bleeding edge STABLE == merely leading edge RELENG == what you are calling "stable"; a release plus security patches only RELEASE == sort of you are calling stable, exactly what was released (not recommended since it lacks any security patches) The latest release is 6.2, so the tag you want in your supfile is RELENG_6_2. That string won't be in any supfile on your system. It's impossible for it to be, since that would require predicting what will be the latest release at the point in the future when you chose to upgrade :-) In technical terms, CURRENT is the top of the main development trunk, and is often referred to with a leading number (e.g. 7-CURRENT), but the number does no more than denote the numeric tag that will be applied when the next branch is made. Once 7.0 starts being created, CURRENT will be 8-CURRENT. STABLE is the latest branch. Code here will become the next Release. Moving code from CURRENT to STABLE, involves a CVS merge operation and is often referred to as MFC - merge from CURRENT. RELENG is a branch created when a specific release is made. It denotes the latest code on that branch, but the only changes made will be critical security fixes. RELEASE is just the point on the RELENG branch which is the actual code which was released on the Release CDs. --Alex PS Be really nice if all this info was clearly in the FAQ, and the FAQ was searchable apart from the whole website. As things stand, a search for "stable" returns precisely nothing, which can't be right.