Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:15:00 -0600 From: Greg Barniskis <nalists@scls.lib.wi.us> To: Sean Murphy <smurphy@calarts.edu> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Am I Right about Stable VS Point Message-ID: <438DFA34.2070308@scls.lib.wi.us> In-Reply-To: <438DE8E8.1050906@calarts.edu> References: <438DE8E8.1050906@calarts.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sean Murphy wrote: > I have read the FreeBSD Handbook Chapter 20 > > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/cutting-edge.html > > I understand what FreeBSD-Current is. > > FreeBSD-Stable is a little fogy for me. Here is what I found and I > think. > > quote "FreeBSD-STABLE is our development branch from which major > releases are made. Changes go into this branch at a different pace, and > with the general assumption that they have first gone into > FreeBSD-CURRENT for testing. This is still a development branch, > however, and this means that at any given time, the sources for > FreeBSD-STABLE may or may not be suitable for any particular purpose. It > is simply another engineering development track, not a resource for > end-users." > > So "Stable" is not really "Stable" it is still a branch for > development and security fixes that go into "Point Releases". Which > means "Point Releases" are the real true "Stable" area. Right? More or less, yes. -STABLE really is pretty stable in my experience, since the development code that gets checked in is ostensibly good, running code that has already been tested. But... sometimes it isn't good code, or sometimes one change conflicts with other recent changes that got checked in. Also, features in -CURRENT may diverge from the last release point by a rather wide margin, so it isn't really the best testing environment for evaluating how a change will affect users when it is grafted onto the last release point -- that is more the job for -STABLE. Finally, some bugs just don't manifest until a wider range of users have tried out the new code. Release points represent a junction where -STABLE really does prove to be very stable for a wide range of uses and platforms. A release might still have some bugs that didn't manifest yet, but that is much less likely than if you run -STABLE. > So when I need a security update I should CVSup the tag line should be > > RELENG_6_0 for the real stable version, also includes bug and security > fixes. This will include the release point code plus /critical/ bug fixes. As I understand it, this is not all available bug fixes, just the fixes for clear operational threats such as security-related bugs or things that might lead to data loss. Minor bugs might not get fixed until the next major release point. Yes, "RELENG_X_Y" is the recommended CVS setting for production servers and any non-expert use, and RELENG_6_0 is ostensibly the most stable and secure branch to be following today. -- Greg Barniskis, Computer Systems Integrator South Central Library System (SCLS) Library Interchange Network (LINK) <gregb at scls.lib.wi.us>, (608) 266-6348
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?438DFA34.2070308>