Glenn Sieb wrote:
Alex de Kruijff said the following on 10/19/2004 9:01 PM:
Gerely speeking, STABLE doesn't mean things never gets broken. Most
reliable are the RELEASE plus fixes. So don't follow 5-STABLE but
5-RELENG
To help ease frustration and such.. you mean:
Follow RELENG_5_2 not RELENG_5 (from: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/cvs-tags.html)
In cvsup-supfile speak for those of us using cvsup to sync our source trees
Thanks for the advice, Alex! :)
Best, G.
Just for general information: Bruce Mah has a fine article, entitled "FreeBSD 5.3-BETA Migration Guide". Worth a read for anyone moving from anywhere towards 5.3-RELEASE, IMO.
http://people.freebsd.org/~bmah/pub/article.html
Kevin Kinsey
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Please forgive my ignorance, but I am looking at the 5.3 Migration Guide, through the link you provided and have a question.
Under section 5.2 source upgrade it says:
"To check out 5.3-RELEASE from the FreeBSD CVS repository, use the RELENG_5_3_0_RELEASE tag. For the 5.3 release and security fix branch, use the RELENG_5_3 tag. To track the FreeBSD 5-STABLE development branch, use the RELENG_5 branch tag."
I understand the RELENG_5_3 and RELENG_5 tags, but am hazy about the RELENG_5_3_0_RELEASE tag meaning. Is this a static branch frozen at a particular date? For a production box, is this the way to go?
_______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
