From nobody@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jul 11 07:13:58 1999
Return-Path: <nobody@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 32767)
	id B95F514D25; Sun, 11 Jul 1999 07:13:58 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <19990711141358.B95F514D25@hub.freebsd.org>
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 07:13:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: jobaldwi@vt.edu
Sender: nobody@FreeBSD.ORG
To: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: [PATCH] New FAQ Entry: "Why shouldn't I just go ahead and run -current?"
X-Send-Pr-Version: www-1.0

>Number:         12595
>Category:       docs
>Synopsis:       [PATCH] New FAQ Entry: "Why shouldn't I just go ahead and run -current?"
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       non-critical
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    freebsd-doc
>State:          closed
>Quarter:        
>Keywords:       
>Date-Required:  
>Class:          doc-bug
>Submitter-Id:   current-users
>Arrival-Date:   Sun Jul 11 07:20:01 PDT 1999
>Closed-Date:    Mon Jul 12 14:26:12 PDT 1999
>Last-Modified:  Mon Jul 12 14:28:55 PDT 1999
>Originator:     John Baldwin
>Release:        3.2-STABLE
>Organization:
>Environment:
n/a
>Description:
A FAQ entry that will discourage people that shouldn't from running
-current.
>How-To-Repeat:
"I just started running -current and now my box freezes!" x 200	
>Fix:
Apply this patch to doc/FAQ/hackers.sgml:

Note: I am more familiar with DocBook than with LinuxDoc, so I may
have some of the tags wrong. :(

Index: hackers.sgml
===================================================================
RCS file: /usr/cvs/doc/FAQ/hackers.sgml,v
retrieving revision 1.16
diff -u -r1.16 hackers.sgml
--- hackers.sgml        1999/04/09 15:43:23     1.16
+++ hackers.sgml        1999/07/11 13:54:49
@@ -35,6 +35,96 @@
 
     <sect1>
       <heading>
+        Why shouldn't I just go ahead and run -current?  That's got
+        all the latest stuff, right?
+      </heading>
+
+      <p>4.0 is the next major release of FreeBSD. For now, and for a
+      while, all -stable releases of FreeBSD will be in the 3.x
+      line. These are minor releases, which do not introduce big
+      changes and we try our best to avoid breaking compatibility
+      backward compatibility (binary, file formats, etc).
+
+      <p>Meanwhile, our fearless developers are cooking the 4.0
+      version. This branch is known as 4.0-current, or just -current
+      (since when 4.0 becomes stable, the current branch will become
+      5.0-current).
+
+      <p>Our developers are fearless because a -current system is
+      something in development, and, thus, subject to all sort of
+      bugs, which can wipe out your disks, burn your monitor, erase
+      your BIOS, overheat your CPU(s), spit out your PCI cards, send
+      the fans flying (sometimes throwing stuff at them first), make
+      international phone calls to phone sex services, print
+      pornography until your printer runs out of paper/toner (sorry,
+      no such luck... it's just the Stark report), send insulting
+      faxes to your boss, cheat on the mob and blame you for it,
+      attract attention for the gentle I.R.S. personel, blow your
+      house fuses, open the gas and then set your house on fire, make
+      your girlfriend break up with you (or your wife cheat on you),
+      and bomb Yugoslavia. This last one we are trying to debug,
+      though [NOTE: at the time of this writing, we have reports that
+      this bug has been fixed].
+
+      <p>Because of the above, we advise against using -current. If
+      you so insist, the following rules must be obeyed:
+
+      <itemize>
+       <item>Read cvs-all. No, I'm not kidding. I mean it.</item>
+
+       <item>Read freebsd-current. Yeah, that one too.</item>
+
+       <item>If something fails, it's probably because you missed a
+       message on cvs-all or freebsd-current.</item>
+
+       <item>If that's not the case, it's probably a temporary
+       bug. Cvsup again after the appropriate time (minimum of one
+       hour, though one full day is not unreasonable).</item>
+
+       <item>If it still crashes *at the same location*, then it's
+       probably your fault. Junk your customized settings, and try to
+       reproduce it with a vanilla system.</item>
+
+       <item>If you can reproduce it even with a vanilla system, then
+       you might actually have stumbled on a bug. Congratulations!
+       Find out what the bug is, and send us the patches.</item>
+
+       <item>If you are not capable of the above, you might just keep
+       quiet and wait until someone fixes it. See steps 1 and 2 for
+       how do you know someone fixed it.</item>
+
+       <item>On the other hand, you might help track down the
+       bug. See the handbook on getting crash dumps, kernel traces,
+       and such stuff.</item>
+
+       <item>If you loose all data on your hard disks because of a
+       bug, that's one of the risks of running -current. Either you
+       can deal with that, or you shouldn't be running
+       -current.</item>
+      </itemize>
+
+      <p>These rules, though written tongue-in-cheek, are for
+      real. FreeBSD 4.0-current is <bf/not/ supposed to work all the
+      time. It is being <bf/developed/, and saying "Hey! I have a
+      bug!"  does <bf/not/ help developers. Furthermore, sometimes it
+      breaks <bf/on purpose/, while things are being changed, and the
+      fixes are <bf/not/ immediate.
+
+      <p>If you can live with that, and think you have any compelling
+      reason to run -current, read the handbook for further
+      instructions.
+
+
+      <p>Sorry if this seems too harsh, but many people are just not
+      used to the concept of a development tree available publicly,
+      and think of it as the "latest version". It is <bf/not/ the latest
+      version. When it is <bf/ready/, it will be the latest
+      version. Until then... read the above.
+
+    <p><em>Contributed by 
+    <url url="mailto:dcs@freebsd.org" name="Daniel C. Sobral">.</em>
+
+    <sect1>
+      <heading>
         How do I make my own custom release?<label id="custrel">
       </heading>


>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:

From: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za>
To: John Baldwin <jobaldwi@vt.edu>
Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: docs/12595: [PATCH] New FAQ Entry: "Why shouldn't I just go ahead and run -current?"
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 17:09:01 +0200

 Hi John,
 
 I think we were all very impressed with Daniel's little rant. However,
 do you really think that adding this _to_ _the_ _FAQ_ will actually
 reduce the number of times this question crops up on the hackers and
 current mailing lists?
 
 I don't think so. I think that the only value of having this in the FAQ
 is so that we can give people the snotty response "Read the FAQ" when
 they ask.
 
 Are you sure that this is a sound motivation for adding the entry to the
 FAQ? This is a genuine question, I'm not just stabbing at the idea.
 
 Ciao,
 Sheldon.
 

From: John Baldwin <jobaldwi@vt.edu>
To: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za>
Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org,
	John Baldwin <jobaldwi@smtp1.erols.com>
Subject: Re: docs/12595: [PATCH] New FAQ Entry: "Why shouldn't I just go
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 16:53:26 -0400 (EDT)

 On 12-Jul-99 Sheldon Hearn wrote:
 > 
 > Hi John,
 > 
 > I think we were all very impressed with Daniel's little rant. However,
 > do you really think that adding this _to_ _the_ _FAQ_ will actually
 > reduce the number of times this question crops up on the hackers and
 > current mailing lists?
 
 Hmmm.  Maybe I'm weird, 'cause when I wanted to upgrade, I went straight to the
 handbook to find out how instead of just asking on -stable or -questions, so I
 tend to assume that if info is in the FAQ/handbook, people will hit that and
 not have to send a message to anyone.  However, from my reading of the
 handbook, I did realize at the time what -current was and that I didn't need to
 run it, so I guess if someone is going to take the time to actually read the
 docs, they won't need the FAQ entry.  So I guess no, it's not going to help.
 
 > I don't think so. I think that the only value of having this in the FAQ
 > is so that we can give people the snotty response "Read the FAQ" when
 > they ask.
 
 Agreed.
 
 > Are you sure that this is a sound motivation for adding the entry to the
 > FAQ? This is a genuine question, I'm not just stabbing at the idea.
 
 Now that I've thought about it more, no.  My earlier inclination was "Hey,
 here's something I can SGML-ify to help out."  And on the surface it would seem
 to be helpful, but when you think about it, the information is already there.
 
 > Ciao,
 > Sheldon.
 
 ---
 
 John Baldwin <jobaldwi@vt.edu> -- http://members.freedomnet.com/~jbaldwin/
 PGP Key: http://members.freedomnet.com/~jbaldwin/pgpkey.asc
 "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!"  -  http://www.freebsd.org
 
State-Changed-From-To: open->closed 
State-Changed-By: sheldonh 
State-Changed-When: Mon Jul 12 14:26:12 PDT 1999 
State-Changed-Why:  
The submitter and I are in agreement that Daniel's FAQ entry wasn't 
really intended as a serious FAQ that would actually reduce the number 
of questions asked on -current or -hackers. :-) 
>Unformatted:
