Subject: Re: Returned mail: see transcript for details
To: Shannon Hendrix <email@example.com>
From: Manuel Bouyer <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/27/2001 19:25:57
On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 09:30:04PM -0400, Shannon Hendrix wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 09:28:28PM +0200, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 07:22:21PM -0400, Shannon Hendrix wrote:
> > > That's not how I thought it worked, and seems counter-intuitive, but it
> > > will do. It seems like there should be a branch for necessary changes to
> > > a release, like bug fixes for example.
> > There *is* a branch, and what't you're getting with the release-1-5 sup
> > release is this branch.
> OK. So you are saying that kernel 1.5.1 beta2 is a normal part of
> this release branch?
> I had the 1.5 kernel, and after running sup this is the kernel that
> I ended up with:
> NetBSD escape 1.5.1_BETA2 NetBSD 1.5.1_BETA2 (ESCAPE) #1: Fri May 25 14:37:01
> EDT 2001 root@escape:/usr/src/sys/arch/sparc/compile/ESCAPE sparc
> > releases are static (a CVS tag in the CVS repository). Bug fixes gets into
> > the release branch (a CVS branch in the CVS repository).
> For /usr/src/usr.sbin and the others it seems to be fine. I saw the
> dhcpd fixes I needed, for example, but nothing marked beta.
> But for the kernel, I ended up with 1.5.1 beta2, and that doesn't sound
> like a bug fix to the release branch.
actually it is. When you fix bugs, at one time you want to push out a new
release with all the bug you fixed. Before releasing it needs to testing
(a bug fix can introduce another bug), so there is a BETA phase.
Manuel Bouyer, LIP6, Universite Paris VI. Manuel.Bouyer@lip6.fr