challenge: end of life for 6.2 is premature with buggy 6.3

[Clifton Royston]

On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 12:18:22PM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Patrick M. Hausen" <hausen at punkt.de>
> 
> >I have never ever had a single problem caused by running RELENG_N.
> >We changed that only because as the number of machines increases
> >it pays to run the same software on all of them, and "RELEASE"
> >provides a convenient (!) reference point for that. Yet, if I were
> >affected by a particular bug in RELENG_6_3, I would simply pick
> >my own later reference point at which the bug is fixed.
> 
> An alternative to this is to maintain a specific set of patches
> to -RELEASE for only the issues / fixes that you are experiencing.
> 
> This has worked very well for us over the years so I can recommend
> it as well.

  I've done this too.  I kept a private 4.8 for years updated with
driver and security patches from 4.9 et seq. once 4.8 support was
discontinued.  Just do the source checkout via CVS and create your own
CVS branch.

  It is more work than I'm prepared for now, where the FreeBSD systems
I'm supporting is part-time consulting; that's why I decided to jump to
a release line.  However, it's a reasonable option for someone who's
maintaining their own larger groups of systems.

  -- Clifton

-- 
    Clifton Royston  --  cliftonr at iandicomputing.com / cliftonr at lava.net
       President  - I and I Computing * http://www.iandicomputing.com/
 Custom programming, network design, systems and network consulting services