Question about naming of stable branch

sic_101

sic_101

Hi there, I'm quite new to FreeBSD. I started with the 15.0-RELEASE and went to STABLE as 15.1 was released. So my 'uname -or' says: "FreeBSD 15.1 STABLE".
Am I right, that when the 15.2 RELEASE will be released, my 'uname -or' will still tell me the same, although I'm up to date? Or will it switch magically to "FreeBSD 15.2 STABLE"?

Or in short: what about minor release numbers of the STABLE branch? The naming is just telling from where I started, right?

sry for my bad english & thanks for reading, cheers!
 
Release branches are created from the stable branches. In a way the stable branches are an alpha release of the next minor release from that major branch.

fufukauliza

Thread 'LTS support and version clarifications'

Hello everybody,
I have read the documentation for a while but have not been able to clarify my doubts.
I will try to be as short as possible.
At present according to this table: https://www.freebsd.org/security/#sup the latest LTS version is Stable 12.
So if I wanted to have a long support I don't have to update for example at 12.2 so just do a package updates.
It's correct?
Finally, I still don't understand the difference between Stable and Release.
Does the Release then become stable and then once stable LTS at least this for the major versions?
Instead, the minor versions remain...
  • Like

sic_101 said:
Am I right, that when the 15.2 RELEASE will be released, my 'uname -or' will still tell me the same, although I'm up to date?
Click to expand...
No, -STABLE is more like a rolling release, stable/15 is now 15.1-STABLE, at some point[*] this changes to 15.2-PRERELEASE and some final preparations are done. Then releng/15.2 is branched off and stable/15 will become 15.2-STABLE, the releng/15.2 branch will be 15.2-RELEASE.

[*] Around 23 October: https://www.freebsd.org/releases/15.2R/schedule/
 
Thanks for the quick response! And if I may ask you another question:
Would you recommend to a noob like me, who just uses the xterm for everything exept watching streams and therefore firefox [on xorg, maybe xlibre soon] to switch to CURRENT?
Because I was switching to FreeBSD from Debian testing and loved to be fully rolling. Or is it really that unstable as noted in the handbook?
 
Why wouldn't you use RELEASE? From the handbook "Welcome to FreeBSD! This handbook covers the installation and day to day use of FreeBSD 15.0-RELEASE, FreeBSD 14.4-RELEASE and 13.5-RELEASE. "

/grandpa
 
sic_101 said:
Would you recommend to a noob like me, who just uses the xterm for everything execpt watching streams and therefore firefox [on xorg, maybe xlibre soon] to switch to CURRENT?
Click to expand...
Stick to a -RELEASE version.

sic_101 said:
Because I was switching to FreeBSD from Debian testing and loved to be fully rolling.
Click to expand...
If you're more adventurous switch to -STABLE. Which is a supported development release.


sic_101 said:
Or is it really that unstable as noted in the handbook?
Click to expand...
It's generally speaking quite stable, but it's the developer's playground, anything can happen, it could destroy your files, it could run perfectly fine. And any state in between.

DutchDaemon

Thread 'Topics about unsupported FreeBSD versions'

The FreeBSD Forums cater primarily to end-users and systems administrators. As such, the Forums focus almost exclusively on FreeBSD versions that are officially supported according to the official FreeBSD website. Since resources are scarce, the FreeBSD Forums strongly suggest that anyone asking questions on the forums run one of the officially supported versions (see the links at the end of this post), for which the installed user base is logically the broadest.

In terms of 'unsupported versions' we make the following distinction:

  1. FreeBSD versions that are...
  • Thanks
  • Like
 
grandpa because I installed 15-RELEASE with pkgbase, which I like, but the upgrade to 15.1-RELEASE was such a mess, that I decided to go STABLE to have it more rolling.
And it's nice, absolutely no problems to maintain it. And It's just my private notebook / daily driver.
So I'm thinking about to switch to current. SirDice I'm just a noob to FreeBSD, got 20 years of debian testing on my back and missing the rolling release...
Maybe after my switch from xorg to xlibre I will upgrade my sandbox to CURRENT and see how it's working for me.

cheers_
 
sic_101 said:
grandpa because I installed 15-RELEASE with pkgbase, which I like, but the upgrade to 15.1-RELEASE was such a mess, that I decided to go STABLE to have it more rolling.
And it's nice, absolutely no problems to maintain it. And It's just my private notebook / daily driver.
So I'm thinking about to switch to current. SirDice I'm just a noob to FreeBSD, got 20 years of debian testing on my back and missing the rolling release...
Maybe after my switch from xorg to xlibre I will upgrade my sandbox to CURRENT and see how it's working for me.

cheers_
Click to expand...

sic_101 said:
Hi there, I'm quite new to FreeBSD. I started with the 15.0-RELEASE and went to STABLE as 15.1 ...
Click to expand...

Sorry I misunderstood, I thought you went from RELEASE to STABLE.

Good luck with CURRENT!

/grandpa
 
sic_101 said:
but the upgrade to 15.1-RELEASE was such a mess, that I decided to go STABLE to have it more rolling.
Click to expand...
Often, more rolling = more mess. You should have a look at my tool:
github.com

GitHub - Emrion/pkgb-update: A tool to make upgrade with pkgbase easy

A tool to make upgrade with pkgbase easy. Contribute to Emrion/pkgb-update development by creating an account on GitHub.
github.com github.com

One thing you have to know is, that in CURRENT all the debug capabilities are on, so the OS should be slower than any other branch. It may be unnoticeable, depending what you do.

And, as SirDice wrote, don't expect (too much) help for CURRENT version on this forum.
 
Emrion said:
One thing you have to know is, that in CURRENT all the debug capabilities are on, so the OS should be slower than any other branch. It may be unnoticeable, depending what you do.
Click to expand...
I saw a comment or blog about that somewhere, and they had a couple options for malloc.conf to turn off debug things on CURRENT + there's a nodebug kernel

I found some more stuff for malloc.conf and use this (forget what most of it means but I like performance :cool:):

Code: 
echo 'abort:false,confirm_conf:false,abort_conf:false,percpu_arena:phycpu,dirty_decay_ms:-1,muzzy_decay_ms:-1,stats_print:false,junk:false,zero:false,utrace:false,xmalloc:false,zero_realloc:free,trust_madvise:true,retain:true' | tee '/etc/malloc.conf' > '/dev/null'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top