Where justifying the Stabble version ?
freebsd at edvax.de
Fri Sep 27 11:31:51 UTC 2019
On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 11:07:58 +0200, White-Wolf wrote:
> I think may be need install an stable version, pers aps for users need
> operating system without bug and stable, easy maintenning and for old
> Witch difference between Stable an Release ?
You can compare it with a process where software is "refined":
Development takes place in -CURRENT or -HEAD. This is experimental,
sometimes crashes, sometimes won't even boot. Features can be
added or removed. This is achieved by obtaining the most current
sources, compiling them, and installing. Developers typically
use this branch.
Things that are found as stable will result in a snapshot in the
-STABLE branch. THe word "stable" means that the ABI is stable
across the whole branch. This also is done via source code.
>From -STABLE, further things are made ready for realease, usually
through -ALPHA, -BETA, -RC (release candidate), -PRERELEASE, and
finally -RELEASE. This is what you find on installation media.
Even though you can use the source code, using binary install
methods is the typical way here.
To allow -RELEASE installs to receive patches, freebsd-update can
be used to add them in a binary way, i. e., without compining, also
known as installing from source. A name of -RELEASE-pX (where X
is the patchlevel number) indicates such an installation.
The ports collection - 3rd party software that is not part of
the FreeBSD OS - is independent. There is one tree, and it can
be used to install the current (!) version of software available
on -CURRENT, -STABLE, -RELEASE-pX, or -RELEASE (unpatched).
This is of course simplified, but basically, that's what makes
the difference between -RELEASE and -STABLE.
You can find more information here (which also explains for whom
a certain branch is primarily intended):
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
More information about the freebsd-questions