On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 03:09:09PM -0700, David Bishop wrote: > I'll try to make this short and to the point, so as to waste as little of > your > time as possible. I'm a relatively new OpenBSD user (stupendous end-user > experience so far, by the way. I'm continually saying, out loud, "that's > it?!??" when I prepare myself to spend hours doing something and it ends up > taking bare minutes. Many, many kudos.), and as such don't have the firmest > grasp on exactly how things are supposed to work. > > I know that ports are associated with each release, so that I can't run > current ports without running -CURRENT. However, I couldn't tell if the > -STABLE ports were "frozen", or if they get updated during the six months > that -STABLE is, well, -STABLE.
-release ports are frozen, and may be updated if really necessary. the branch containing those updates is called -stable. > I.e., if something in ports is broken, > because of an ftp path change, does it get fixed and a new ports.tar.gz > generated, or does it wait? only security issues and major reliability problems are fixed in -stable. ftp paths are not fixed... > Do I need to be running -CURRENT to be able to > help in this regard? if you want to test new ports or port updates/fixes, yes. see also FAQ 5.1 for more info about the different branches, and FAQ 15 for packages/ports related things. > As you could probably guess, this is not a completely hypothetical question. > lsof has been bumped a version, and the old version was pushed into an old/ > subdirectory. Obviously ports could be fixed by either grabbing it from the > new (old :-) subdir, or by just grabbing the newer version - that's a > separate question. I just wanted to know if that's the sort of thing that I > should be reporting as a bug against -STABLE. no, but it appears to be a problem in -current as well. in this case, the port has a maintainer, so you should contact him first, but i presume he is also reading this list :) steven Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm
