On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 21:04:50 +0100, Karel Kulhavy wrote > Thanks, this is a much better explanation than in FAQ sec. 5. The explanation > in FAQ doesn't mention the fact that not only the -current, but also > the -stable is a moving target, though a slowly moving one. > > Now I have 4.0-release and want to have a fixed kernel (4.0-stable). > Which version of sources should I download then? 4.0-release or 4.0-stable? > > CL< >
Here's how it works for you beginners out there. Experts correct me if I'm wrong. I would not post this, but I was a little confused too when I first started out. OpenBSD developers add code and fix bugs using a program called CVS. CVS has the ability to create branches like a tree. The main tree trunk is -current. After a certain amount of time, usually a couple of months before the release date, a branch is created called 4.1. This branch is frozen, meaning that no new features will go in but bugs will be fixed. When release date comes, every six months, they take the 4.1 branch on that day and mark it as the release. Then they make CD's from the release. Keep in mind that this release day is not the same as the day it's released to the public because the developers need time to create the cd's. From the 4.1 branch, fixes are added whether they are bugs or reliability fixes; this is referred to as 4.1-stable. There are many fixes in 4.1-stable so only the important and critical ones appear in the errata. -current is still the main tree trunk; this is the code where developers "develop". 4.1-stable is where developers "maintain". In the next 4 months it will be frozen again with a branch called 4.2 and the whole process starts over again. Anoncvs is read-only access to cvs which allows anybody: 1) to see what the developers are doing 2) to submit additions and fixes to the developers 3) patch your system whether it's -stable or -current 4) create a system with the latest code, "-current" cvs/anoncvs keeps track of pure source code. This is why OpenBSD doesn't do binaries, because the small group of developers would rather exert their energy on code than binaries. Concentrating on code instead of binaries makes development as a whole a lot less complex and thus more reliable and secure. If you're a developer, you want to code because you enjoy it. A developer doesn't want to waste his time compiling binaries for each architecture and and make sure they are reliable. That's very very time consuming.
