Re: How to keep kernel up-to-date with Security/Errata Fixes?

["Simon 'corecode' Schubert" <corecode@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 26.03.2006, at 04:00, Dragronfly Kernel List User wrote:
                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  you might want to 
insert $realname here, or at least spell "DragonFly" correctly...

> Not trying to argue with you, but simply trying to discern the
> differences between the release cycles of DF and FBSD, it seems to me
> that DF's RELEASE release cycle is a mixture of FBSD's Release and
> Stable with some native features.

> DF's patches are committed without thorough testing (like FBSD Stable)
> and RELEASE sub-versions are bumped up without code freezes, release
> candidates or betas (native to DF).

How can you state that patches are commited without thorough testing?  
First of all you don't know how much testing the developers actually do 
before committing the patch.  And secondly, patches which go to 
-release are security and bug fixes ONLY.  We don't add features to 
-release like freebsd does on -stable.  You really need to read 
documentation before making such claims.

> When DF full RELEASE versions are bumped up (I think) there are code
> freezes (like FBSD Release).

You are wrong again.  It is a feature freeze, no code freeze.

> If this is in fact the way DF RELEASE releases come out, I fail to see
> why a 1.6.2 would be "safer" than the official 1.6.0 (or for that 
> matter
> 1.4.3 vs. 1.40).

It is not, in fact.

> I'm simply trying to plan for the best release to install on the
> production server.

Always the latest release.

--
Serve - BSD     +++  RENT this banner advert  +++    ASCII Ribbon   /"\
Work - Mac      +++  space for low €€€ NOW!1  +++      Campaign     \ /
Party Enjoy Relax   |   http://dragonflybsd.org      Against  HTML   \
Dude 2c 2 the max   !   http://golden-apple.biz       Mail + News   / \

Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part