Hi, On 02 June 2012 AM 9:14:28 Chris Rees wrote: > On Jun 2, 2012 4:04 AM, "Erich Dollansky" <er...@alogreentechnologies.com> > wrote: > > > > But I have to mention one disadvantage. The ports are in no way linked to > the releases. This leads to situations in which a small change in a basic > library will result in a complete update of the installed ports. I > expressed this already many time here. It would be of advantage if the > ports tree would also have tags like the base system itself. > > > > Unfortunately this is a massive amount of extra work - we only just keep up > with updates as it is.
I do not think so. At least not for the first step as I see it. Just make snapshots of the ports tree when the release comes out. These snapshots are with the releases anyway. What I did was very simple. I got the ports tree that comes with the release and installed the system back to the release status. Ok, it was some work for me - maybe not for others - to find this tree. A simple link could help here. I do not know if this is just an opinion which is too optimistic. What I know is that all the security fixes which appeared since the release are not in there. If I have the choice between three days or more of compiling and known security holes, I will take the security holes, make the client happy and upgrade after the work for the client is finished. I would not expect that FreeBSD will provide more than this. Erich _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
