Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN

At 02:45 PM 11/26/2005, matt . wrote:
>Wow I must be missing something here on a very basic,
fundamental level.
>
>I run FreeBSD-RELEASE on a production box.  I have my
reservations but it
>was the only release that supported my RAID controller,
so I had no choice
>(or buy a $300 raid card that was supported).  Anyway it
works fine so far
>(knock heavily and repeatedly on huge pieces of wood).
>
>I've read the FreeBSD notes regarding the differences
between STABLE,
>CURRENT and RELEASE.  So uh, what is supposed to be run
on a production
>box?  In plain sight on the FreeBSD site it says
"Latest production release"
>which is 6.0-RELEASE...are we only supposed to run
RELEASE on production
>systems or are we supposed to run STABLE?  Seems to me
it's
>counter-intuitive to call something STABLE and not have
it meant for
>production.  My head hurts.
>
>matt

I couldnt agree more with this comment. My head hurt after
trying to figure this out as well..

Yea. The information seems to contradict itself.
The only thing I have been able to 100% figure out is:

#*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6_0
-> release branch/security fixes only
Results in: 6.0-RELEASE

#*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6
-> 6.0 + changes will eventually be 6.1
Results in: 6.0-STABLE

It is perhaps a bit easier in OpenBSD land. -STABLE means
only 
bugfixes and important patches. In FreeBSD - this seems not
the case?

-JD


_______________________________________________
freebsd-questionsfreebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-que
stions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-questions-unsubscribefreebsd.org"

J.D. Bronson wrote:
> At 02:45 PM 11/26/2005, matt . wrote:
> 
>> Wow I must be missing something here on a very
basic, fundamental level.
>>
>> I run FreeBSD-RELEASE on a production box.  I have
my reservations but it
>> was the only release that supported my RAID
controller, so I had no
>> choice
>> (or buy a $300 raid card that was supported). 
Anyway it works fine so
>> far
>> (knock heavily and repeatedly on huge pieces of
wood).
>>
>> I've read the FreeBSD notes regarding the
differences between STABLE,
>> CURRENT and RELEASE.  So uh, what is supposed to be
run on a production
>> box?  In plain sight on the FreeBSD site it says
"Latest production
>> release"
>> which is 6.0-RELEASE...are we only supposed to run
RELEASE on production
>> systems or are we supposed to run STABLE?  Seems to
me it's
>> counter-intuitive to call something STABLE and not
have it meant for
>> production.  My head hurts.
>>
>> matt
> 
> 
> I couldnt agree more with this comment. My head hurt
after
> trying to figure this out as well..
> 
> Yea. The information seems to contradict itself.
> The only thing I have been able to 100% figure out is:
> 
> #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6_0
> -> release branch/security fixes only
> Results in: 6.0-RELEASE
> 
> #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6
> -> 6.0 + changes will eventually be 6.1
> Results in: 6.0-STABLE
> 
> It is perhaps a bit easier in OpenBSD land. -STABLE
means only bugfixes
> and important patches. In FreeBSD - this seems not the
case?
> 
> -JD

STABLE is Not what you think. Its a work in progress.
Towards the next
release. Not quite CURRENT, but not RELEASE.

RELEASE IS what you would think STABLE might be. The 6_0 tag
follows all
security patches etc.

STABLE follows the work as it's being don within the banch.
And what
will eventually be the next RELEASE

-- 
Best regards,
Chris

The first bug to hit a clean windshield lands directly
in front of your eyes.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questionsfreebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-que
stions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-questions-unsubscribefreebsd.org"

J.D. Bronson wrote:
> At 02:45 PM 11/26/2005, matt . wrote:
> 
>> Wow I must be missing something here on a very
basic, fundamental level.
>>
>> I run FreeBSD-RELEASE on a production box.  I have
my reservations but it
>> was the only release that supported my RAID
controller, so I had no
>> choice
>> (or buy a $300 raid card that was supported). 
Anyway it works fine so
>> far
>> (knock heavily and repeatedly on huge pieces of
wood).
>>
>> I've read the FreeBSD notes regarding the
differences between STABLE,
>> CURRENT and RELEASE.  So uh, what is supposed to be
run on a production
>> box?  In plain sight on the FreeBSD site it says
"Latest production
>> release"
>> which is 6.0-RELEASE...are we only supposed to run
RELEASE on production
>> systems or are we supposed to run STABLE?  Seems to
me it's
>> counter-intuitive to call something STABLE and not
have it meant for
>> production.  My head hurts.
>>
>> matt
> 
> 
> I couldnt agree more with this comment. My head hurt
after
> trying to figure this out as well..
> 
> Yea. The information seems to contradict itself.
> The only thing I have been able to 100% figure out is:
> 
> #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6_0
> -> release branch/security fixes only
> Results in: 6.0-RELEASE
> 
> #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6
> -> 6.0 + changes will eventually be 6.1
> Results in: 6.0-STABLE
> 
> It is perhaps a bit easier in OpenBSD land. -STABLE
means only bugfixes
> and important patches. In FreeBSD - this seems not the
case?
> 
> -JD
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questionsfreebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-que
stions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> "freebsd-questions-unsubscribefreebsd.org"
> 
> 

And here once again, the website tells us:

http://www.freebsd.org/doc/e
n_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/current-stable.html#STABLE

Good Lord, it's a wunnerful thing to read.

-- 
Best regards,
Chris

The first bug to hit a clean windshield lands directly
in front of your eyes.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questionsfreebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-que
stions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-questions-unsubscribefreebsd.org"

FreeBSD should really consider changing the name of their
branch name STABLE
to DEV or PRE-RELEASE, since it clearly states on
freebsd.org the STABLE
branch is for those wishing to track and contribute to the
development
process of the next FreeBSD RELEASE.  It makes sense to
leave RELEASE the
way it is, since RELEASE branches are meant exactly for how
their namesake
states.   FreeBSD-CURRENT pretty much self-explains what
it's meant for,
which is the latest, bleeding edge code, which once tested
is added to
STABLE...or wait, then maybe CURRENT should be called DEV? 
aaaaahhh!!  

matt

On 11/26/05, J.D. Bronson <jbronsonwixb.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> I couldnt agree more with this comment. My head hurt
after
> trying to figure this out as well..
>
> Yea. The information seems to contradict itself.
> The only thing I have been able to 100% figure out is:
>
> #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6_0
> -> release branch/security fixes only
> Results in: 6.0-RELEASE
>
> #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6
> -> 6.0 + changes will eventually be 6.1
> Results in: 6.0-STABLE
>
> It is perhaps a bit easier in OpenBSD land. -STABLE
means only
> bugfixes and important patches. In FreeBSD - this seems
not the case?
>
> -JD
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questionsfreebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-que
stions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-questions-unsubscribefreebsd.org"

> I couldnt agree more with this comment. My head hurt
after
> trying to figure this out as well..
>
> Yea. The information seems to contradict itself.
> The only thing I have been able to 100% figure out is:
>
> #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6_0
> -> release branch/security fixes only
> Results in: 6.0-RELEASE
>
> #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6
> -> 6.0 + changes will eventually be 6.1
> Results in: 6.0-STABLE
>
> It is perhaps a bit easier in OpenBSD land. -STABLE
means only 
> bugfixes and important patches. In FreeBSD - this seems
not the case?
>
> -JD

I agree, i think that was my mistake.. i come from using
OpenBSD and 
*thought* -STABLE meant RELEASE+ security fixes.. Which is
MY fault for 
not paying closer attention to the docs..
oh well i am now informed.

-rob

On 2005-11-26 14:52, "J.D. Bronson"
<jbronsonwixb.com> wrote:
>At 02:45 PM 11/26/2005, matt . wrote:
>> Wow I must be missing something here on a very
basic, fundamental
>> level.
>>
>> I run FreeBSD-RELEASE on a production box.  I have
my reservations
>> but it was the only release that supported my RAID
controller, so I
>> had no choice (or buy a $300 raid card that was
supported).  Anyway
>> it works fine so far (knock heavily and repeatedly
on huge pieces of
>> wood).
>>
>> I've read the FreeBSD notes regarding the
differences between STABLE,
>> CURRENT and RELEASE.  So uh, what is supposed to be
run on a
>> production box?  In plain sight on the FreeBSD site
it says "Latest
>> production release" which is 6.0-RELEASE...are
we only supposed to
>> run RELEASE on production systems or are we
supposed to run STABLE?
>> Seems to me it's counter-intuitive to call
something STABLE and not
>> have it meant for production.  My head hurts.
>
> I couldnt agree more with this comment. My head hurt
after
> trying to figure this out as well..
>
> Yea. The information seems to contradict itself.
> The only thing I have been able to 100% figure out is:
>
> #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6_0
> -> release branch/security fixes only
> Results in: 6.0-RELEASE
>
> #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6
> -> 6.0 + changes will eventually be 6.1
> Results in: 6.0-STABLE
>
> It is perhaps a bit easier in OpenBSD land. -STABLE
means only
> bugfixes and important patches. In FreeBSD - this seems
not the case?

That's RELENG_6_0 here.  We call these the "security
branches".

The -STABLE branch is a more actively maintained branch, out
of which
the future releases of 6.1-RELEASE, 6.2-RELEASE, ... will be
made.

A lot of this is explained in ``Choosing the FreeBSD Version
That Is
Right For You'', at

http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/art
icles/version-guide/

I hope this helps a bit,

Giorgos

_______________________________________________
freebsd-questionsfreebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-que
stions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-questions-unsubscribefreebsd.org"