|Daemon News Ezine||BSD News||BSD Mall||BSD Support Forum||BSD Advocacy||BSD Updates|
Murray, On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 01:55:44AM -0700, Murray Stokely wrote: > On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 10:12:34AM +0200, Sandro Tolaini wrote: > > Just a question about ports: I saw that the ports tree has the matching tag > > for 4.6.1 release at the same revisions of 4.6 (that is, ports bundled with > > 4.6.1 release CDs will be the same packaged with 4.6). I think that ports > > bundled with 4.6.2 should be more recent. > > The RELEASE_4_6_1 tag in /ports is indeed very similar to the > RELEASE_4_6_0 tag. This is necessary because of the huge amount of > effort that portmgr@ and the entire ports team put into doing quality > assurance work in the month leading up to a release. We can not > simply use the current head of the ports/ tree, because many important > packages are not building. It usually takes us WEEKS to get a package > set put together for 4.X where both KDE and GNOME fully build. The > only way we can provide a package set for our 4.6.X point release is > if we base it off of the 4.6 ports tree, with as few modifications as > possible. > > The packages are all being rebuilt on 4.6.2 machines so that they > are linked with the new OpenSSL libraries, etc.. > > You can always see the build logs for the package cluster at > http://bento.FreeBSD.org. You can also read a little about the setup > in the releng-packages article. While I understand about the testing cycle taking weeks, does this mean that the apache/openssl/other vulnerable ports in 4.6-RELEASE are also not updated? I thought one of the goals of the in-between release was to fix these packages. Could you clarify this? --Stijn -- Nostalgia ain't what it used to be.
Description: PGP signature