Subject: Re: security fixes and 1.6 branch of pkgsrc
To: Frederick Bruckman <email@example.com>
From: Johnny C. Lam <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/05/2003 19:38:59
On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 01:30:11PM -0600, Frederick Bruckman wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Julio Merino wrote:
> > On Sun, 5 Jan 2003 12:58:24 -0600 (CST)
> > César Catrián <email@example.com> wrote:
> > > You should always use current pkgsrc.
> > No. -- AFAIK, the 1.6 branch should incorporate security updates and
> > bugfixes, so that you could keep a stable system with secure and stable
> > packages. If it is not beeing done, I do not know the reason :p
> It's pretty difficult to translate from pre-buildlink2 to
> post-buildlink2, which is why I myself have stopped requesting
> pull-ups. For my own desktops, I rebuilt everything against the branch
> a couple of months ago, and now track current. The packages themselves
> haven't gone through much churn (as the build system has), so it's
> easy to update one or two at a time from the current pkgsrc.
It's on my TODO list to backport the buildlink2 stuff in pkgsrc/mk to the
netbsd-1-6 branch. Then we can request pullups of various buildlink2.mk
files as they are needed. That should make updating packages on the
netbsd-1-6 branch much easier.
-- Johnny Lam <firstname.lastname@example.org>