Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 16 Oct 2014 14:29:51 +0100
From:      RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com>
To:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Noob question ....
Message-ID:  <20141016142951.2ceed51c@gumby.homeunix.com>
In-Reply-To: <543FBB5E.5050904@hiwaay.net>
References:  <543F041D.7030206@hiwaay.net> <20141016013646.34d542e6.freebsd@edvax.de> <543F0863.60205@hiwaay.net> <543F72C7.6040401@qeng-ho.org> <543FBB5E.5050904@hiwaay.net>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Thu, 16 Oct 2014 07:34:38 -0500
William A. Mahaffey III wrote:

> On 10/16/14 02:24, Arthur Chance wrote:

> > Think of "stable" as in "doctors said his condition was stable". :-)
> >
> > -CURRENT == will break regularly.
> >
> > -STABLE == shouldn't break but might occasionally.
> >
> > -RELEASE == won't break (if your hardware is OK and you don't do 
> > something stupid).
 
> 
> Thx, good description, I think I have it straight now :-) ....

A lot of the risk comes from being sloppy with the extra work required
to track STABLE and CURRENT. 

If you track STABLE then any update can bring in the kind of change that
comes with switching to a new minor release: new system users/groups,
updated files that have to be handled manually.

If you track CURRENT then any update can bring in the kind of change
than comes with switching to a new major release, which may mean you
have to rebuild some or all of your ports or follow recipes to
avoid breakages.

Updating to a point release can be done with practically no effort.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20141016142951.2ceed51c>