> On Feb 12, 2021, at 5:31 PM, tech-lists <tech-li...@zyxst.net> wrote: > As subject, where to get sources for 12-stable upgrade now? Is it still > svn or is it git?
tl;dr: git is the source of truth, but there’s a bunch of details that might matter. The current source of truth is git repository on gitrepo.freebsd.org. It is the canonical repo for the project. A very close copy can be found at cgit.freebsd.org (it usually lags by the time it takes to copy new commits over to it, usually some small number of seconds). All other sources are derived from these. The subversion repo was the source of truth for FreeBSD between the time it was adopted until git replaced it late last year. Prior to using subversion, CVS was the source of truth. The CVS repository was retired when we did the conversion to subversion. For the life of the stable/11 and stable/12 branches (and any releng branches from those), we will be mirroring commits to those branches to the subversion repository. When we were doing the conversion, we often heard that changing VCS mid-branch would be too burdensome and would really go against the branch stability guarantees we have. The svn mirroring service should be a faithful reflection of the git source of truth. Or is modulo bugs and semantic differences in the different VCS. If there’s a discrepancy, then git is authoritative. There will be a lag between what’s committed to git and its appearance in svn mirrors because the mirroring is done via a cron job and there’s propagation delays. Since subversion has different semantics, it expands the $FreeBSD$ keywords in the source, while git does not (and cannot in a meaningful way). This will result in a difference between trees checked out in one versus the order. Normally, this difference is inconsequential, though some folks may need it for various reasons. There’s a small wrinkle with any 12.x releases. Those will be built out of the subversion mirror of the git source of truth. We’re doing this to continue the $FreeBSD$ expansion through the life of the 12.x branch. This will result in a slightly different build for the non-reproducible builds when one builds out of subversion vs out of git. Should there be a difference between the svn sources and git sources, say due to a bug in the mirroring or the $FreeBSD$ expansion being meaningful, this can lead to some confusion. If this is a material difference, an updated would be issued right away to correct it. And in this case, the source of truth is still the git repo, it’s just been transformed in various ways before landing in the source artifacts that are used to create a release. In many ways the little difference have long been accepted. The tree you get from the old CVS repo differed from the tree you’d get from the same version post conversion to svn from the svn repo because of semantic differences in how $FreeBSD$ was expanded. You could never checkout a 2.1 release from subversion and get exactly the sources that phk used to build the 2.1.0 release because CVS expanded the keywords as $FreeSBD: foo.c 1.7$ and svn expanded them $FreeBSD: path/to/file/foo.c 3255$. This is muddied a bit further with the git conversion since the sources on the ISO images were used to recreate the 1.x series of releases. There may also be some early tags that haven’t made it through all the conversion processes... Even the git repo copies that are mirrored out differ slightly in that they publish a slightly abridged version. GitHub’s interface does not like having ~10k entries in it for the ‘branch’ menu. So we don’t publish vendor branches to GitHub because of how the subversion repo vendor branches and tags were converted lead to too many branches for GitHub to be happy. This information is available from gitrepo.freebsd.org, however. Warner _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
