ARRRRGH! Guys, who's breaking -STABLE's GMIRROR code?!

Karl Denninger karl at denninger.net
Sun Sep 10 17:13:50 PDT 2006


On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 08:11:22PM +0000, Michael Abbott wrote:
> >>You can track changes to a particular release - say by using
> >>RELENG_6_1 rather than RELENG_6. In which case, would you still
> >>say you are tracking STABLE?
> >If I track RELENG_6 (once 6.0-RELEASE has gone out) then I'm by definition
> >tracking -STABLE.
> 
> Damn, I'm confused now.  Let me try and get this straight:
> 
> CURRENT
> 	This is, by definition, broken a good part of the time, and is 
> what it says, namely current, ie work in progress.
> 
> STABLE
> 	This is broken some of the time and .. uh .. isn't really all that 
> stable, actually.
> 
> RELENG_n_m
> 	This is completely stable and only tracks security fixes.

Incorrect.  This is "completely FIXED", which is not the same thing as STABLE.
"Fixed in a broken state" is still broken, aka the serial I/O problems in 6.x
that I've found (and for which there is apparently no current fix in any of
the branches of 6.x.)

> RELENG_n (RELENG_6 at the moment)
> 	Has somebody just said that RELENG_6 = STABLE?  I'm going to guess 
> then that RELENG_7 is CURRENT.
> 	No, this doesn't make sense to me at all.
> 
> >Indeed, the current tag on my CVS tree is TRELENG_6!
> 
> Eh?  T?

As in "Tag", which is the syntax that acutally shows up in the "CVS"
directory under the source tree.

--
-- 
Karl Denninger (karl at denninger.net) Internet Consultant & Kids Rights Activist
http://www.denninger.net	My home on the net - links to everything I do!
http://scubaforum.org		Your UNCENSORED place to talk about DIVING!
http://genesis3.blogspot.com	Musings Of A Sentient Mind




More information about the freebsd-stable mailing list