RW wrote:
On Tuesday 05 September 2006 09:35, Erik Norgaard wrote:
In the standard-supfile for the base system you'd specify RELENG_6 which
means you'll get head of -STABLE, or if you are conservative RELENG_6_1
which means that you'll just get security patches to the 6.1 release.
I do wish people wouldn't give inexperienced users the impresssion that
running 6-stable (RELENG_6 ) is the norm - this is a development branch.
I don't try to give any indication of what is the norm. I mention two
options, none of which would mean a switch onto the -CURRENT branch
which was the principal concern in OP.
Further, the OP was really concerned with ports, and I do make an effort
both to explain how stay on a particular branch and why the tagging is
on the ports collection is not the same as the base system - hence the
shift -RELEASE/-STABLE/-CURRENT is not a big difference.
I personally run RELENG_6_1 on my servers and RELENG_6 on my laptops,
while using HEAD of the ports collection on both - and everything is
quite /STABLE/ :)
I'd recommend you follow the norm that works for you, and define one if
it has yet to be defined.
Cheers, Erik
--
Ph: +34.666334818 web: http://www.locolomo.org
X.509 Certificate: http://www.locolomo.org/crt/8D03551FFCE04F0C.crt
Key ID: 69:79:B8:2C:E3:8F:E7:BE:5D:C3:C3:B1:74:62:B8:3F:9F:1F:69:B9
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
