Quote:
Originally Posted by moosejaw
My understanding is: if you run -release + patches, or if you run -stable, then any third-party packages or ports you run must be those that shipped with the release, or that are in the -stable ports tree.
|
Basically correct.
Sometimes, updates are pushed down to the
-stable & even the
-release branches. You can determine if updates have been pushed down to these branches by looking at the CVS tree. As an example for Firefox 3.5
(Firefox 3.6 is currently unavailable due to the impending release of OpenBSD 4.8...), the project's Web interface for the ports tree shows that the
Makefile was updated a few days ago:
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvswe...www/firefox35/
Clicking the link for "
Makefile" shows the individual check-ins & more importantly for this discussion, the CVS tags. Note that Revision 1.40.2.1 has the tagname
OPENBSD_4_8. This is the tag associated with the
-stable branch. If additional updates are pushed to
-stable, this tag will move to a newer revision.
On the other hand, the tag
OPENBSD_4_8_BASE denotes the version of
Makefile associated with
-release. Most likely, this tag will never move from Revision 1.40, but if any changes were pushed down to 4.8
-release, you would see this tag move to a newer revision too.
Quote:
|
If you run -stable, then you cannot run any version of Firefox that is newer than the one found in the -stable ports tree. This means that you rely on the maintainers of the -stable ports tree for Firefox security updates.
|
Correct, however, updates
sometimes are pushed to
-stable.
Quote:
|
Is it okay to use a patch branch system (i.e., -release + patches) with a -stable ports tree? From the FAQ, it seems that -stable doesn't introduce any major system/library changes that aren't also included in the patch branch...
|
The bulletproof answer is to always match the version of the ports tree to that of the system, however, running
-stable ports on
-release should be alright.
Quote:
|
Do folks here know if Firefox is kept reasonably up to date in the -stable ports tree? Or is running -current really the only way to keep up with Firefox?
|
I don't closely follow
-stable as I run
-current. Perhaps others will respond with their experience, but you can always trace through the CVS tree yourself to determine whether the lag is acceptable.