On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 12:12:18PM +0300, Sergey Kandaurov wrote: > On 1 December 2011 10:20, Milan Obuch <freebsd-curr...@dino.sk> wrote: > > On Tue, 29 Nov 2011 19:22:39 +0300 > > Sergey Kandaurov <pluk...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On 29 November 2011 20:16, Maxim Khitrov <m...@mxcrypt.com> wrote: > >> > On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 10:30 AM, Sergey Kandaurov > >> > <pluk...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> On 26 November 2011 11:44, Milan Obuch <freebsd-curr...@dino.sk> > >> >> wrote: > >> >>> Hi, > >> >>> > >> >>> I am playing a bit with 9.0-PRERELEASE compiling it from source > >> >>> updated via csup. In both example files there is line specifying > >> >>> what to csup > >> >>> > >> >>> *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_8 > >> >>> > >> >>> which is incorrect, I think. It is convenient for me to issue just > >> >>> > >> >>> csup -h cvsup.freebsd.sk /usr/share/examples/cvsup/stable-supfile > >> >>> > >> >>> to update full sources without need to create any cvsup config > >> >>> file, however in system installed from 9.0 snapshot (maybe two > >> >>> weeks old) this file points to version 8 files, so I need to > >> >>> correct it for 9.0-PRERELEASE to not accidentally download older > >> >>> version sources. > >> >>> > >> >>> The same is also true after upgrade from source - make > >> >>> installworld install example files pointing to older version... > >> >>> > >> >>> Is it something I do not know about or is it an oversight? I > >> >>> think this line should already be changed to new tag... > >> >>> > >> >>> *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_9 > >> >> > >> >> Hi. > >> >> > >> >> Fixed. Thanks for your report. > >> >> Now cvs tag points to RELENG_9 in 9.x sources. > >> > > >> > Should standard-supfile also be updated to point to RELENG_9_0? I'm > >> > using csup with "tag=RELENG_9_0" and standard-supfile still points > >> > to HEAD. > >> > >> Yep, sure. > >> I just sent a request to the Release Engineering Team. > >> > > > > It works for me now as expected, thanks. > > > > Anyway, there is a question what the difference between stable-supfile > > and standard-supfile should be. I looked in my local csupped sources, > > they are the same in 6-STABLE (OK, some history here), 7-STABLE, > > 8-STABLE and 9-STABLE. Are they expected to be used differently? > > In STABLE branches standard-supfile and stable-supfile are used to have > the same cvs tag. FYI, compare how it is done in RELEASE branches. > > > And, second one - what about CURRENT? In stable-supfile I see > > tag=RELENG_9 which is not quite clear, but just for some pedantry... I > > use standard-supfile for CURRENT, so this is not an issue for me either. > > To my knowledge, in CURRENT a standard-supfile's cvs tag should be > read as "the latest (i.e. the most recently created) stable branch". Could the supfiles be generated from some value in newvers.sh ?
pgpWdpj5GwCx0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
