On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 01:35:10PM -0500, Craig Boston wrote: > > Now this is totally bogus. The freeze before the 6.0 release was VERY > > long and several have been longer than this one has been so far. > > I think the complaint may be more a result of this being a deeper freeze > than normal.
That's correct. > When ports is frozen before a release, it is often still > possible to get things like security fixes and minor updates approved > and committed. The only time it's completely frozen is during > branching, which typically doesn't take very long. Most "freezes" are really more of a slush. This is the first time we've done an absolute, hard, freeze of this length in a long time. But importnng or upgrading several hundred ports, moving those and others from X11BASE to LOCALBASE, and all the associated testing and retesting and re-retesting just simply requires that we have everything locked down tight right now. The alternative would have been to commit what we had and _then_ found out all the bugs in the upgrade process (note: you won't be able to just blindly use portupgrade -af; you will need to read the UPDATING file for the proper procedure. This is the unusual case of being such a sweeping change that the port management tools are not completely up to the task.) > I don't know if portmgr@ has approved any commits during the xorg freeze > or not. Nope. There are simply too many ports that have interdependencies among the xorg ports. mcl _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
