1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Current VS Stable VS Release

Discussion in 'General' started by jemate18, May 3, 2009.

  1. jemate18

    jemate18 New Member

    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi guys!

    I have a freebsd 7.1-RELEASE.


    I have read the difference between STABLE VS CURRENT
    found here: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/current-stable.html

    I want to know the difference of RELEASE VS STABLE
    found something here: http://www.freebsd.org/relnotes.html
    but I'm so sorry can't really find the exact answer to the difference between STABLE and RELEASE

    So if I have a RELEASE is it possible to change/update it to STABLE?

    Thanks and please bear with me.

    Regards,
     
  2. DrJ

    DrJ New Member

    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    0
    -STABLE is the development part of the -RELEASE branch. For example, when 7.1-RELEASE is brand new, development for 7.2 begins. That is 7-STABLE. Once 7.2 is released, then the development for 7.3 begins as 7-STABLE.

    Sure. Just change your default tag to RELENG_7, and go through the make buildworld, kernel and install both. Don't forget mergemaster to reconcile the various configuration files.
     
  3. jemate18

    jemate18 New Member

    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wow thanks.

    Another question, so which do you recommend

    RELEASE for a casual home user?
    STABLE for a server or an enterprise usage?

    And also by saying that when 7.1-RELEASE is out, development for 7.2 which is called STABLE is done. Therefore the packages on the STABLE branch is more bleeding edge that 7.1 RELEASE.

    I also use pkg_add -r package_name to install my programs, since I'm under RELEASE, then the fetched packages are under RELEASE,

    If for example I opt not to upgrade to 7.1-STABLE as of this time, can I get the packages from that repository using pkg_add -r? How?
     
  4. DrJ

    DrJ New Member

    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    0
    For any use where stability is critical, use -RELEASE. Period. Usually -STABLE is pretty good, but it does have bugs. That's the point, in a way. Whether you want to run -STABLE as a casual user depends on what you want. If you want the bleeding-edge features of this development branch (namely, not -CURRENT), then run -STABLE. There will be bugs and improvements along the way.
    Yes. They are not quite as recent as what is in ports, but the delay is not too bad.
    Yes. You have to use the right "repository". You do it by setting an environment variable:
    set PACKAGESITE to ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-7-stable/Latest/
     
  5. jemate18

    jemate18 New Member

    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks.. Problem solved...
     
  6. BeastieBoy

    BeastieBoy New Member

    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks, this thread helped me to stick to RELEASE.
     
  7. fronclynne

    fronclynne New Member

    Messages:
    1,297
    Likes Received:
    0
    It should be in the FAQ: "If you have any questions about whether you should be running -STABLE or -RELEASE, run -RELEASE. If you're still not sure, run -RELEASE. If after this you still think you might want to try -STABLE, go ahead and run -RELEASE. If you have an extra machine sitting around and you don't mind pulling half of your hair out trying to figure out why the sound suddenly stopped working last night at 3:04am, okay -STABLE might be interesting to you for a few minutes."
     
  8. nekoexmachina

    nekoexmachina New Member

    Messages:
    312
    Likes Received:
    0
    just to be honest, nothing like that with -stable running on my desktop. I do an update when i feel like it, e.g. once per month or two.
     
  9. fronclynne

    fronclynne New Member

    Messages:
    1,297
    Likes Received:
    0
    I know, I've run -CURRENT on my laptop when I needed a certain network driver, but there's still no guarantee. -STABLE has broken or incomplete drivers from time to time, and driver updates can cause breakages (& I know this from personal experience), and while they're usually fixed in pretty short order on -STABLE, it's still a good idea to stay away unless you're sure you need to use it.

    Back when I did run 8-CURRENT, I would csup the latest tree, watch freebsd-current@freebsd.org for at least two days in case something funky was going on, and then buildworld. Even then I had to back out a kernel at least once.
     
  10. SirDice

    SirDice Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    17,392
    Likes Received:
    7
    In the 10+ years I've been running -STABLE (3-STABLE, 4-STABLE, 5-STABLE, 6-STABLE, 7-STABLE and currently 8-STABLE) it never broke once.
     
  11. phoenix

    phoenix Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    3,407
    Likes Received:
    2
    You've been lucky. Spend a year or two on the freebsd-stable mailing list, and you'll see that it breaks fairly often. :) It really all depends on how often you update your sources. :)
     
  12. DutchDaemon

    DutchDaemon Administrator Staff Member Administrator Moderator

    Messages:
    10,661
    Likes Received:
    23
    I update all -STABLEs I have about once per 1-2 months. Saw maybe three or four breakages in 15 years? Usually solved by a re-c(v)sup or by pulling in a source tree of the day before. Hardly any drama in running -STABLE ;)
     
  13. SirDice

    SirDice Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    17,392
    Likes Received:
    7
    Exactly. I probably update a little more often but never had any major issues. Nothing a csup and a rebuild didn't fix. The only other issues were mainly due to changed functionality and it broke because I didn't read UPDATING.
     
  14. oliverh

    oliverh New Member

    Messages:
    557
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's true. But on the other hand you have to wait a looong time to get the fixes. And if your server doesn't run, well, then stable is the only alternative. And in reality I have got the most problems with realeases since 7 and 8.
     
  15. terietor

    terietor New Member

    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    0
    just a few more questions.

    is there FreeBSD 8-current??? or the FreeBSD-current is FreeBSD 9?

    what is freebsd head?

    thanks for the great topic

    P.S.:sorry if i shouldn't post here,but i thought that my question i relevant to the specific topic if not my apologies.
     
  16. BeastieBoy

    BeastieBoy New Member

    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think FreeBSD Current is called a rolling version, it is continuously evolving and will never have an end. It's the latest bleeding-edge freebsd code committed by developers.
     
  17. zeiz

    zeiz New Member

    Messages:
    691
    Likes Received:
    0
  18. sistematico

    sistematico New Member

    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    First, sorry for very old thread :e
    Second, how to do this?

    Thank you.
     
  19. jb_fvwm2

    jb_fvwm2 Member

    Messages:
    1,569
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best to post the results of
    Code:
     df -aH 
    so persons who may wish to reply would know whether to suggest using svn (subversion) or cvsup. Or, search other threads with the word 'supfile' ... I presume at least a few have the answer.
     
  20. ikbendeman

    ikbendeman Member

    Messages:
    257
    Likes Received:
    0
    Could you please explain what you mean by this? And what are the advantages to zsh over tcsh (which I've always used)? If there's a thread out there anwering this, please PM me.
     
  21. jb_fvwm2

    jb_fvwm2 Member

    Messages:
    1,569
    Likes Received:
    1
    zsh? Search the web for the thread 'zsh(rc) tips thread' (Linux) and it has a large number of .zshrc, all you'd have to do probably is adjust paths, programs, omit 'autoload' (some of them, not all, I'm clueless, but some slow down the command line completion times) and be surprised (many threads at news.ycombinator.com also have zsh usages), as the settings and aliases have already been crafted for the most part.

    If you are wondering about Lookat /usr/ports/sysutils/lookat, it has keybindings (s, search, t, top, # , go to page number, q, exit, ...) that are MS-DOS-easy. Also one can set colors etc. I've set it as $PAGER so man pages are easier to search through, go to a specific place in the page, etc. (But a full path in pipes, to lookat, may be needed if it is the last item in the pipe.)

    The other topic in that signature I've explained in detail to the freebsd-questions, freebsd-ports, and freebsd-current mailing lists, as well as many other threads here. Sort of digressing, unfortunately, to repeat it, but it is out there.
     
  22. jb_fvwm2

    jb_fvwm2 Member

    Messages:
    1,569
    Likes Received:
    1
    Code:
    cd /var/db/pkg
    gnuls -oSr | grep p5 | grep -v bKi | grep -v Tk | head -30 (-1050 until) | awk '{print $8}' | xargs -J % find % -type f -name +MTREE_DIRS -exec /bin/ls -lac {} \; | grep -v "v 2" (to exclude November)  | awk '{print $9}' | gtr -s \/ "\n" | grep p5  | xargs -J % portmaster -d -B -P -i -g % && yell || yell
    
    To answer further, I'm worried about pkg doing away with the possibility of using that specific pipe to upgrade (as here) thousands of ports at once, twenty at a time. But I may as well post the fix for a tenth of them that fail to install...
    Code:
    cd /usr/ports/[failing port] && make -DNO_PACKAGE -DNO_STAGE -DMAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE reinstall && /bin/rm -rf work && cd /var/db/pkg 
    ... just in case it helps anyone else in the meantime. Of course, each time the commands are re-run only a few characters of the command have to be edited, but edge cases also took quite a while, most because the packages inadvertently depended upon the older Perl version, or a dependency had not been upgraded to the newer version yet.