----- Original Message -----
From: "Ralph Huntington" <rjhmohawk.net>
To: "Kevin Kinsey, DaleCo, S.P." <kdkdaleco.biz>
Cc: <freebsd-securityFreeBSD.ORG>
Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 2:41 PM
Subject: Re: security fixes

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

As opposed to -CURRENT, yes. However,
the committers want everyone to realize that
once in a while you might build -STABLE with
something broken (albeit rare, as in the coincidence
of the "blue moon" and "hen's teeth" together...)
but it still could happen. -RELEASE is a -STABLE
that gets frozen for a while to see if any problems
pop up, or if it can be crowed about and burned
to CD with confidence (I hope the RELENG team
doesn't think I'm minimizing their hard work here.)

Some people read the warning about -STABLE in
the Handbook (that I quoted earlier) and decide only
to run -RELEASE and patch security fixes, and
there is a cvs tag for this, called RELENG_4_x.
This is where a little confusion comes in, because
after a while they quit patching the older releases.
The official line is that it's the current release (4.6)
and the last (4.5) that are being patched, so if
you're still running 4.4-R, (for example) you're no
longer sure you can cvsup with RELENG_4_4
and get any new patches.

As I said, -STABLE's running fine for me
right now and has everytime I've tried it.

[If there's confusion on the term "production
machine," I take this to mean an active
www/mail/file server that you can't afford
to have downtime on....]

KDK

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

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