cvs -R export -r RELENG_5_2 src

[Julian H. Stacey]

Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On Sun, 2004-Aug-15 13:50:32 +0200, Julian Stacey wrote:

> http://www.FreeBSD.org/releases/5.3R/schedule.html
Thanks.

> >Anyway, it seems those CVSUP users have a luxury we CTM users don't
> >have: they get to have a more recent kernel, why is that ?
> I'm not sure what you are getting at here.

Looking to track beyond 5 releases, but not current ie -r RELENG_5_2

> CVSup also allows you to pick arbitrary CVS tags, wheres CTM is
> limited to RELENG_3, RELENG_4 and head.  

Yes, I was suggesting we use -r RELENG_5_2 in absence of -r RELENG_5

> If this is a problem, use CTM
> to replicate the repository and do your own checkout.

I did, as written in my initial post "cvs -R export -r RELENG_5_2 src"

It had occured to me if I started doing that regularly, & other were too,
that was a similar tracking scenario in response to which src-4 was created,
so would be useful to have a src-5 even though yes it would be based on
RELENG_5_2 & not RELENG_5.

> > why can't we have a CTM 5 stable feed.
> 
> Because 5-STABLE doesn't exist yet.

Doesn't mean we couldn't export on RELENG_5_2, just not on RELENG_5,
it would still allow some tracking up the 5.2 p8 p9 p10 kernel fixes etc.
.. till "-r RELENG_5" comes available later.

>From what you quoted http://www.FreeBSD.org/releases/5.3R/schedule.html
	RELENG_5 branch creation  	16 Aug 2004  	
That's today, so soon probably, if it doesn't slip a bit.

So it looks like my idea came too late, might as well wait for RELENG_5 now.

( But rather than just forget the idea, it might be worth remembering
the possibility for when 6.low_somethings come round later. )

-
Julian Stacey.  Unix C & Net Services Consultant, Munich.  http://berklix.com
		Mail Ascii plain text.  Html dumped as Spam.
	Ihr Rauch = mein allergischer Kopfschmerz.  Nimm Schnupftabak !
 Evil Software Patents:  http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/0,1518,312066,00.html