On Sun, 4 Sep 2011 17:22:02 +0200 Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 09:11:33AM +0000, Thomas Mueller wrote: > > Gerard Lally <gerard%netmail.ie@localhost> wrote: > > > > > Am I correct in thinking HEAD for 5-1 is the 5-1 RELEASE (of > > > November 2010) plus fixes (up to September 2011) *without* the new > > > features that will come with the 6.0 release (LVM, NPF, etc.)? > > > > > Sorry - I phrased this the wrong way. > > > > > What I should have said is, am I correct in thinking the latest > > > 5-1 at NetBSD-daily is the 5-1 formal RELEASE (of November 2010) > > > plus fixes (up to September 2011) *without* the new features that > > > will come with the 6.0 release (LVM, NPF, etc.)? > > > > > If so, is this a better ISO to use than the formal release ISO of > > > 11-2010? Does it include just security patches or does it include > > > new drivers as well? > > > > >From what I've been told, and my interest in this is access to > > >Linux ext2fs partitions, that you need to follow the netbsd-5 > > >branch, not 5-1. > > > > That would be the most advanced, what would lead to NetBSD 5.2 if > > that ever happens. HEAD is the work in progress toward NetBSD 6.0. > > > > netbsd-5 branch is called "NetBSD 5.1_STABLE". > > That is the netbsd-5 branch. I think Gerard asked about the netbsd-5-1 > branch. > Yes, netbsd-5-1 is the 5-1 formal RELEASE plus critical fixes. > netbsd-5 is the 5-1 formal RELEASE plus critical fixes plus not so > critical fixes, plus some features (like newer hardware support). Now I'm confused again! :) If I go to netbsd-5-1 at NetBSD-daily and then for example to the amd64 ISO for 201109030130Z am I downloading 1) the 5-1 formal RELEASE plus critical fixes, or 2) the 5-1 formal RELEASE plus critical fixes plus not so critical fixes, plus some features like newer hardware support? (Until I am comfortable with -current I am more interested in using the latter option.)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature