> > In cvsup'ing the patched sources, if I have a 4.6-RELEASE box, should I
> > cvsup RELENG_4_6 and for the earlier 4.x machines cvsup RELENG_4 ???

> I don't think that you'd break anything by doing RELENG_4_6 even on
> your earlier boxes, though. After all, you're going to make
> buildworld anyway...

Yes, I'll make buildworld.

> If you cvsup the "earlier" machines to RELENG_4, they will actually
> be "more up to date" than the 4.6-RELEASE box you have now, not
> that I'm telling you something you don't already know, I guess.

I thought that, but frankly wasn't sure. It seem counterintuitive, but
that doesn't mean it's not the right way.

> > Or should they all get RELENG_4 ?

> If you want them all to run -STABLE, yes. Personally, -STABLE seems
> pretty -STABLE right now, for me, running mail, web, database, etc.
> They say "you may not wish to run -STABLE on production servers" so
> *caveat emptor*, I guess, but I have no probs with -STABLE built last
> week.

Hmmm... I would think STABLE is what one sould want to run on a production
machine. I'm beginning to feel confused again.

Thanks for the reply, though. It did answer my question.

I also received this in an email reply:

"... you can cvsup RELENG_4_6 to get the security update ONLY and make
world to install it, or you can use RELENG_4 to get the security fix AND
new -STABLE code, then make world."

That makes RELENG_4 seem like a bargain.

Thanks again for the replies, Ralph

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomoFreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]