How Often

Majorix

Majorix

How often should I check for updates in the 10-CURRENT branch? It takes 2 frigging whole nights on my netbook for the update to finish if it also involves buildworld, and I don't want to do it too frequently.

I have upgraded to -CURRENT a few days ago, still learning my way around. Please help.
 
I thought that by trial and error I would learn faster :) I am doing ok for a starter I believe. Solved all the problems so far.
 
No one forces you to upgrade. You can stay at the revision you use as much as you want. It's just that upgrading may solve some bugs (and probably introduce new ones).
Just out of curiosity, how stable is -CURRENT nowadays? For some time, I've been itching to try it on my PC (I actually used it, after 9.0 feature freeze, but then switched to stable/9). What ports don't compile for you?
 
If you are running -CURRENT, you should be on the mailing list, and you should decide whether or not the changes implemented are worth updating for (based on your FreeBSD and general unix systems experience).

However, if you are starting out, stay away from -CURRENT. It is not what it is for. Even if you are experienced with FreeBSD, if you aren't a developer you may still run into problems you aren't able to solve (additionally, it may trash your system, make your toilet back up, kill your dog, etc).

You're better off tracking -STABLE for "possible mild breakage" but up to date software.

If you have to ask questions about -CURRENT, you probably shouldn't be running it...



edit:
-STABLE is not like "Debian Stable" if you've come from Linux. -STABLE is more like Debian TESTING, and -CURRENT is sort of like the combination of Debian UNSTABLE + whatever pre-release kernel Linus has in development, running on his own box. FreeBSD -RELEASE is more like Debian "Stable", for comparison.

If you're not pretty clued up with C development and the way Unix in general is supposed to work, steer clear...

From the sounds of it (your previous threads) what you really should be tracking is -STABLE. It is still fairly current, there is just (not supposed to be) ABI breakage. The tree may still be broken occasionally. -STABLE is the equivalent of "rolling release" that you were initially looking for.
 
@throAU: While you are spot-on with your comments, it might be more of a PIA for him to switch to 9 now (backup configs, do a clean install, re-configure everything and all that) than to chug along until things get intolerable. Could have avoided the situation, had he asked "which branch" before installing.

Anyhow, @Majorix:
Updating weekly, per 10 days or even bi-weekly should keep your system in healthy status. If you have a certain port that did not compile or if you are seeing a system problem and it annoys you, update sooner. For ports always read /usr/ports/UPDATING for port-specific update warnings. You can also use several tools like ports-mgmt/portaudit, sysutils/bsdadminscripts.
There's also an excellent tool (port) which searches for installed ports, compares it to warnings in UPDATING and displays a custom report specific to your system. Can't recall the name - maybe some other gent will remember and post it.
 
Thanks for all the comments, guys.

Unfortunately, I am already on -CURRENT, and I believe it will be impossible to go back to -STABLE without re-installing. However should I face a problem I can't overcome, and it prevents further happy-computing, I will re-install to -STABLE. It is just that it will take a lot of time now.
 
I know it's totally unsupported, but you MIGHT successfully downgrade the same way you upgraded: download the sources of stable/9, compile world, kernel, install and merge everything, then recompile installed ports. That said, I haven't tried it, for some it works, for others doesn't.
 
I don't want to risk it. I put a lot of effort into building the system into what it is now. And the computer itself made a lot of effort while compiling too :p
 
Beeblebrox said:
@throAU: While you are spot-on with your comments, it might be more of a PIA for him to switch to 9 now (backup configs, do a clean install, re-configure everything and all that) than to chug along until things get intolerable. Could have avoided the situation, had he asked "which branch" before installing.
Click to expand...

Thing is, he did ask in a previous thread, -STABLE was suggested, and he went with -CURRENT anyway.

Live and learn I guess.

I agree it is probably a pain to fix now. If nothing else, please pay attention to what @wblock just said.

Have backups. If 10 trashes your system, it won't be FreeBSD's fault. It is a bleeding edge development branch (not intended to be run by end users), so again - backup, follow the list, keep an eye on your dog, etc...
 
I apologize in advance, I don't want to hijack thread, just a quick question concerning this subject.

What would be easiest way to see ALL the changes done in -STABLE branch since its latest -RELEASE?
 
Read through the messages here (change 8 to 7 or 9 as needed):
svn-src-stable-8

You can see the change number of your current system via $ uname -a

And then just glance down the list of messages (each has a change number in it) for things that catch your eye, and click on them to read the commit messages.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top