Morning,
> Am 20.09.2017 um 19:27 schrieb Mark Linimon :
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 10:15:32AM +0200, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
>> A pointer to the official policy would be nice 8-}
>
> 3rd paragraph of:
>
> http://www.freebsd.org/portmgr/policies_eol.html
One comment: it's easy to overlook the imp
On 20/09/2017 19:47, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
Hi!
Am 20.09.2017 um 04:09 schrieb Aristedes Maniatis :
At the very least I need to remember to keep poudriere on the x.0 release even
after it is EOL,
until every one of my servers has been upgraded
Not necessarily. You can run build jails with
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 07:33:20PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
> FreeBSD has always had a policy of backwards compatibility. By that
> definition we are stable. What we don't promise is full forwards
> compatibility, which is what you are asking for.
In particular, "we add things to the ABI" sometim
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 10:15:32AM +0200, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
> A pointer to the official policy would be nice 8-}
3rd paragraph of:
http://www.freebsd.org/portmgr/policies_eol.html
mcl
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd
Hi!
> Am 20.09.2017 um 04:09 schrieb Aristedes Maniatis :
> At the very least I need to remember to keep poudriere on the x.0 release
> even after it is EOL,
> until every one of my servers has been upgraded
Not necessarily. You can run build jails with lower OS versions on an up-to-date
poudrie
On 20/9/17 11:33AM, Warner Losh wrote:
> FreeBSD has always had a policy of backwards compatibility. By that
> definition we are stable. What we don't promise is full forwards
> compatibility, which is what you are asking for.
Correct. Within the stable branch I'd always assumed forward compati
On Sep 19, 2017 6:05 PM, "Aristedes Maniatis" wrote:
Matthew Seaman wrote:
>
> Ports are still being built according to the same policy -- on the
> earliest still-supported release of each major branch.
>
> It's just that now, for 11.x and subsequent, 11.0 goes out of support a
> month or so afte
Matthew Seaman wrote:
>
> Ports are still being built according to the same policy -- on the
> earliest still-supported release of each major branch.
>
> It's just that now, for 11.x and subsequent, 11.0 goes out of support a
> month or so after 11.1-RELEASE comes out. You're meant to have upgra
Hi all,
> Am 19.09.2017 um 10:32 schrieb Aristedes Maniatis :
> Then we have a problem since
> https://pkg.freebsd.org/freebsd:11:x86:64/latest/All/ has been built on 11.1,
> not on 11.0 (I just tested it with csync2 which I know fails). Packages there
> may fail to run on 11.0, but there is no
On 19/09/2017 09:32, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:
> On 19/9/17 6:15PM, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>>> Now that we are on a faster upgrade policy for minor branches, it is
>>> expected that we'll upgrade from 11.0 to 11.1 to 11.2 much faster than in
>>> the old days. I can cope with that, but it ap
On 19/9/17 6:15PM, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> Now that we are on a faster upgrade policy for minor branches, it is
>> expected that we'll upgrade from 11.0 to 11.1 to 11.2 much faster than in
>> the old days. I can cope with that, but it appears that functional changes
>> are also being made
Hi!
> Now that we are on a faster upgrade policy for minor branches, it is expected
> that we'll upgrade from 11.0 to 11.1 to 11.2 much faster than in the old
> days. I can cope with that, but it appears that functional changes are also
> being made within the stable branch as seen here:
>
> h
12 matches
Mail list logo
