Mihai Popescu B.S. wrote: > Hello, > > Since the applications packages are not updated anymore for -release / > -stable I decided to follow the snapshots. I know that this way is for > experienced users and I'm not as good as a developer but I need to stay > with this. The FAQ is not so rich in answers for this section. The other > option is to follow -current, but as I see one must sync the source from > a CVS server and then recompile periodically. I want to let this step > for later to follow.
snapshots IS following current, with a lot less pain. Current is a moving target. In the time it takes to read this note, the definition of what -current is may have changed a few times. It certainly did in the time it took me to write it. So, the current you build will be different than the snapshot you download, but they were both at one point -current, and neither is anymore. Granted, snapshots often contain uncommitted diffs, but if anything, that can make them slightly more than current. > > For all those who follow somehow the snapshots, I want to ask a few > questions I stumbled upon: > > 1. Sometimes, the files present on the snapshots/i386 don't have all the > same date/time, usually the "kernel" files differs from X files - is it > fine to mix different compile files ? Does it mean that X files are not > affected by kernel & other stuff new modifications ? it means they are built separately from one another. You should have a (more-or-less) matching X and base, but you use as close as you can get. There might be (pulling numbers out of thin air) five times in a release cycle when something might change in base that would cause an old X to not run with a newly installed new base. If your X snaps are just a few days older than base, odds are they are on the "same side" of a break point. If they are two months apart, odds are they are on the wrong sides of a break point. However, stuff happens...and if something in base needs a new X build, there will be a day or more of incompatibility. However, those are usually dealt with quickly, at least on platforms that can have the word "quickly" attached to them. > 2. Saying that I have some "snapshot" installed and a new package or an > update for the package is added on ftp - is it safe to install it on the > existing snapshot (assuming that the ftp snapshot was already renewed ) ? safe to attempt...yes. Bet your life on it? No. Likely to work? No. When you wish to install a new package, start with a new snapshot install, then upgrade your existing packages then install your new package. You can try to avoid the "start with a new snapshot" step, but be aware you may end up doing it. The package tools are wonderfully smart about not breaking your system, so the worst that is likely to happen is a message indicating this package requires a different library than you have available. > 3. I'm trying to establish a rule on how often I need to reinstall the > new snapshot, can you give some advices ? Every six months? We recommend that as a minimum upgrade schedule anyway...so that's a good starting point. As needed? Every time you add/update a new package, you will probably have to start with a new upgrade, and that's not all bad. Hint: sysmerge. (-release/-stable followers: don't bother looking, it's only in -current.) All the developers and porters follow -current, along with a fair number of users. It's not that hard to do, really. Most of the hysteria and fear you hear about -current is based on other systems which tend to work on a "I break it now, hopefully someone else will fix it eventually" model. That's not how OpenBSD is developed. People who break things are beaten, and then the remains are expected to fix it immediately. Nick.
