On 5/22/06, Tobias Weisserth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Starting with 2.7, OpenBSD provides a source tree that contains important
patches and fixes (i.e. those from the errata plus others which are obvious
and simple, but do not deserve an errata entry) and makes it available via
CVS in addition to the current source."
from http://www.openbsd.org/stable.html
So having a release and applying patches to it is not exactly the same as
following the stable branch. How far are those methods apart?
stable has some more changes in it that rank slightly less important
than errata.
I have read that mixing up checked out subsystems from CVS like src, ports and
XF4 cannot be done across different branches without breaking the system at
some time. Let's assume I don't want to spend the extra compile time and
bandwidth following stable and I'll stick with the release and apply the
patches. How does that leave me with ports? Is it safe to use a release,
apply the errata and checkout/use the ports from CVS stable? If not, what
alternative do I have?
that's ok. you can't mix stable src and current ports, or other
combos, but stable ports and errata patches are "the same".
"Mixing and matching of patching solutions can be done if you understand how
everything works, but new users should pick one method and stick with it."
from http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq10.html#Patches
Is this what I was reffering at?
sometimes the errata patch may be different than the stable commit.
so if you apply the patch and update you can get conflicts, or if you
update and then apply the errata, patch will think the diff is
reversed and back it out. neither event is catastrophic, but if you
weren't aware such things could happen, you probably aren't prepared
to deal with it.
