Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!uunet!in1.uu.net!206.229.87.25!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!sprint!cs.utexas.edu!data.ramona.vix.com!nnrp1.crl.com!not-for-mail From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@FreeBSD.org> Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: RELENG vs SNAP? Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 02:56:23 -0700 Organization: Walnut Creek CDROM Lines: 51 Message-ID: <336868C7.500F9F30@FreeBSD.org> References: <E9Gr70.30x@nonexistent.com> <199704302229.SAA11945@xxx.video-collage.com> <Pine.BSI.3.94.970430181735.5050A-100000@main.put.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: time.cdrom.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (X11; I; FreeBSD 2.2-STABLE i386) To: Louis Epstein <le@main.put.com> Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:40100 Louis Epstein wrote: > > On Wed, 30 Apr 1997, Mikhail Teterin wrote: > > > In article <E9Gr70.30x@nonexistent.com>, > > le@put.com (Louis Epstein) writes: > > > How is a RELENG FreeBSD like the April 22 2.2.x different from a SNAP > > > FreeBSD like the 970209 3.0? > > > > Check comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.announce for explanations. > > Shortly, SNAPSHOTs are more likely to work -- RELENG-today is > > "what the SNAPSHOT-today would be, if it was made today" > > Hmm,I thought was what -current was like! No. Consider: There are currently three active/semi-active branches in the CVS repository: RELENG_2_1_0 AKA 2.1-stable AKA "2.1 branch" RELENG_2_2 AKA 2.2-stable AKA "2.2 branch" HEAD AKA -current AKA 3.0-current HEAD is not an branch actual tag, like the other two, it's just a symbolic constant for "the current, non-branched development stream" which we, of course, map to whatever's "-current" at the time. Right now that's the 3.0 development. The 2.2 branch forked off of -current in November 1996 and 2.1.0 departed -current in September of 1994, IIRC. Now. SNAPs are made from -current, that is to say 3.0. They happen infrequently, whenever I feel like doing one (e.g. I or someone else wants something tested), and this generally doesn't happen more than 3-4 times a yea. You will probably even see one in a couple of days, in fact, if I can get people to stop breaking the tree for long enough to complete my release build (grr). In any case, the releng22.freebsd.org machine is a special case, created just for the 2.2 branch, and it essentially builds a full release *every day* from wherever the RELENG_2_2 tag happens to be pointing that day. If the release build succeeds, the release is moved into the anonymous FTP area there. If it fails, I get a mail telling me "Hey, somebody broke the 2.2 branch! Bad hacker! No cola!" and I go and investigate. The 2.2 branch is not supposed to break since people are only supposed to be committing bug fixes and well-tested enhancements to that branch, nothing experimental or untried (sometimes they do anyway, but hey - this is a volunteer-driven project and we try to take that in stride :-). Clearer now? - Jordan Hubbard FreeBSD core team / Walnut Creek CDROM.