From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Jun 29 15:16:43 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE84237C1D3 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 15:16:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA23997; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 16:15:13 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20000629161214.04ba14a0@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 16:15:04 -0600 To: Neil Blakey-Milner From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Why can't upgrades be simpler? Cc: cjclark@alum.mit.edu, Brooks Davis , Francisco Reyes , FreeBSd Chat list In-Reply-To: <20000629102655.A62528@mithrandr.moria.org> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20000629021220.04f8ae40@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20000628112835.00de8710@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20000627131107.0449d500@localhost> <200006270352.XAA29208@sanson.reyes.somos.net> <200006270352.XAA29208@sanson.reyes.somos.net> <20000626232045.A17065@orion.ac.hmc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20000627131107.0449d500@localhost> <20000628095257.A44982@mithrandr.moria.org> <4.3.2.7.2.20000628112835.00de8710@localhost> <20000628215142.C451@dialin-client.earthlink.net> <4.3.2.7.2.20000629021220.04f8ae40@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 02:26 AM 6/29/2000, Neil Blakey-Milner wrote: >What sort of things are you talking about? Almost all changes should go >through -CURRENT before being applied, but there can certainly be >exceptions for well-tested, verified, script(1)'d make release'd code. One of the problems with the way things are done now is that patches often CAN'T go through -current. For example, the modifications to the TCP/IP stack to harden the system against DoS attacks were totally different on 4.0 than on 3.x. 4.0 got priority, because it was the "latest and greatest," even though it was NOT EVEN AT 4.0-RELEASE yet. I think you'll agree that it should not have been a higher priority than -STABLE. How would you avoid this? >Really, give some examples of cases where things can't be done via >-CURRENT, and you'll get more response. See above. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message