From nobody@FreeBSD.org  Sat Jan 12 00:32:56 2002
Return-Path: <nobody@FreeBSD.org>
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.21])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 797D937B41A
	for <freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org>; Sat, 12 Jan 2002 00:32:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from nobody@localhost)
	by freefall.freebsd.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g0C8WuU68403;
	Sat, 12 Jan 2002 00:32:56 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from nobody)
Message-Id: <200201120832.g0C8WuU68403@freefall.freebsd.org>
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 00:32:56 -0800 (PST)
From: ji overholt <overholt@cisco.com>
To: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org
Subject: stable supfile get you release, should get stable
X-Send-Pr-Version: www-1.0

>Number:         33806
>Category:       misc
>Synopsis:       stable supfile get you release, should get stable
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       serious
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    freebsd-bugs
>State:          closed
>Quarter:        
>Keywords:       
>Date-Required:  
>Class:          sw-bug
>Submitter-Id:   current-users
>Arrival-Date:   Sat Jan 12 00:40:01 PST 2002
>Closed-Date:    Sat Jan 12 01:25:30 PST 2002
>Last-Modified:  Sat Jan 12 14:30:01 PST 2002
>Originator:     ji overholt
>Release:        4.4 stable (oops 4.5 prerelease)
>Organization:
cisco
>Environment:
FreeBSD champion-station.cisco.com 4.5-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 4.5-PRERELEASE #0: Sat Dec 29 15:54:13 GMT 2001     root@overholt-dhcp1.cisco.com:/usr/src/sys/compile/CHAMPION-STATION  i386

>Description:
both the stable and standard supfiles get RELENG_4
that's ok for the standard file,
but should the stable file get you 4.X.stable?
>How-To-Repeat:
grep "cvs tag" /usr/share/examples/cvsup/sta* /usr/src/share/examples/cvsup/sta*
/usr/share/examples/cvsup/stable-supfile:*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_4
/usr/share/examples/cvsup/standard-supfile:*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_4
/usr/src/share/examples/cvsup/stable-supfile:*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_4
/usr/src/share/examples/cvsup/standard-supfile:*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_4

>Fix:
change the stable supfile to get the latest stable release.
i installed 4.4 and cvsup using the stable supfile,
and expected to get 4.4-STABLE, i got 4.5-PRERELEASE.
>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:

From: Ryan Thompson <ryan@sasknow.com>
To: ji overholt <overholt@cisco.com>
Cc: <freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject: Re: misc/33806: stable supfile get you release, should get stable
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 03:12:21 -0600 (CST)

 This is not a bug.
 
 
 ji overholt wrote to freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG:
 
 > >Description:
 > both the stable and standard supfiles get RELENG_4
 > that's ok for the standard file,
 
 > but should the stable file get you 4.X.stable?
 
 Yes. RELENG_4 is currently the -STABLE branch.
 
 
 > >Fix:
 > change the stable supfile to get the latest stable release.
 
 This is not the intended behaviour. If you want to get a particular
 release (such as 4.4-RELEASE) specify, for example:
 	*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_4_4_0_RELEASE
 
 If you want to get the latest -STABLE additions to 4.4, try this:
 	*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_4_4
 
 
 > i installed 4.4 and cvsup using the stable supfile,
 > and expected to get 4.4-STABLE, i got 4.5-PRERELEASE.
 
 The stable supfile is working exactly as intended.
 
 - Ryan
 
 -- 
   Ryan Thompson <ryan@sasknow.com>
   Network Administrator, Accounts
 
   SaskNow Technologies - http://www.sasknow.com
   #106-380 3120 8th St E - Saskatoon, SK - S7H 0W2
 
         Tel: 306-664-3600   Fax: 306-664-1161   Saskatoon
   Toll-Free: 877-727-5669     (877-SASKNOW)     North America
 
State-Changed-From-To: open->closed 
State-Changed-By: cjc 
State-Changed-When: Sat Jan 12 01:25:30 PST 2002 
State-Changed-Why:  
RELENG_4 _is_ STABLE. The ususal confusion over the PRERELEASE and RC 
tags. But no bugs or problems with the supfiles. 

http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=33806 

From: "Crist J . Clark" <cjc@FreeBSD.ORG>
To: ji overholt <overholt@cisco.com>
Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: misc/33806: stable supfile get you release, should get stable
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 01:23:10 -0800

 On Sat, Jan 12, 2002 at 12:32:56AM -0800, ji overholt wrote:
 [snip]
 
 > >Description:
 > both the stable and standard supfiles get RELENG_4
 > that's ok for the standard file,
 > but should the stable file get you 4.X.stable?
 
 It does. RELENG_4 == 4-STABLE.
 
 > >Fix:
 > change the stable supfile to get the latest stable release.
 > i installed 4.4 and cvsup using the stable supfile,
 > and expected to get 4.4-STABLE, i got 4.5-PRERELEASE.
 
 They are the same branch.
 
   http://www.freebsd.org/internal/releng45.html
 
   http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/cvs-tags.html
 
 -- 
 "It's always funny until someone gets hurt. Then it's hilarious."
 
 Crist J. Clark                     |     cjclark@alum.mit.edu
                                    |     cjclark@jhu.edu
 http://people.freebsd.org/~cjc/    |     cjc@freebsd.org

From: Mike Makonnen <mike_makonnen@yahoo.com>
To: ji overholt <overholt@cisco.com>
Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: misc/33806: stable supfile get you release, should get stable
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 01:36:22 -0800

 On Sat, 12 Jan 2002 00:32:56 -0800 (PST)
 ji overholt <overholt@cisco.com> wrote:
 > >Description:
 > both the stable and standard supfiles get RELENG_4
 > that's ok for the standard file,
 > but should the stable file get you 4.X.stable?
 
 The supfiles are correct. Standard-supfile gets you the latest sources in the -CURRENT branch(which is the development branch). Stable-supfile gets you the latest -STABLE sources (which currently is 4.x). 
 
 The releases are simply "snapshots" of the stable branch. That is to say, the stable branch code goes into code-freeze a couple of months before a realease is due, and only important changes and bug fixes are commited to the -stable branch.
 During this time various realease candidates (RC) are also released for testing. You just happened to cvsup when we are getting ready to come out with a new release in the -stable branch.
 
 Cheers,
 mike makonnen

From: Jim Overholt <overholt@cisco.com>
To: mike_makonnen@yahoo.com (Mike Makonnen)
Cc: overholt@cisco.com (ji overholt),
	freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: misc/33806: stable supfile get you release, should get stable
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 11:30:51 -0800 (PST)

 but the standard supfile also points to RELENG_4.
 
 in fact the only difference between the 2 is comments, so why have 2.
 supfile-standard will not get current, it will also get RELENG_4.
 
 jim
 
 
 > 
 > On Sat, 12 Jan 2002 00:32:56 -0800 (PST)
 > ji overholt <overholt@cisco.com> wrote:
 > > >Description:
 > > both the stable and standard supfiles get RELENG_4
 > > that's ok for the standard file,
 > > but should the stable file get you 4.X.stable?
 > 
 > The supfiles are correct. Standard-supfile gets you the latest sources in the -CURRENT branch(which is the development branch). Stable-supfile gets you the latest -STABLE sources (which currently is 4.x). 
 > 
 > The releases are simply "snapshots" of the stable branch. That is to say, the stable branch code goes into code-freeze a couple of months before a realease is due, and only important changes and bug fixes are commited to the -stable branch.
 > During this time various realease candidates (RC) are also released for testing. You just happened to cvsup when we are getting ready to come out with a new release in the -stable branch.
 > 
 > Cheers,
 > mike makonnen
 > 
 > 
 

From: "Crist J . Clark" <cristjc@earthlink.net>
To: Jim Overholt <overholt@cisco.com>
Cc: Mike Makonnen <mike_makonnen@yahoo.com>,
	freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: misc/33806: stable supfile get you release, should get stable
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 14:16:02 -0800

 On Sat, Jan 12, 2002 at 11:30:51AM -0800, Jim Overholt wrote:
 > 
 > but the standard supfile also points to RELENG_4.
 > 
 > in fact the only difference between the 2 is comments, so why have 2.
 > supfile-standard will not get current, it will also get RELENG_4.
 
 revision 1.17.2.2
 date: 2001/04/11 21:50:13;  author: nik;  state: Exp;  lines: +2 -2
 Consensus on -stable (and #fightclub) is that "standard-supfile" should
 default to the branch from which the code came.  So if you pull down
 RELENG_4 it defaults to RELENG_4, get -current and 'tag=.'.  And when
 we get the 'bug fix only' branch for 4.3, standard-supfile on that
 branch should point specifically at that branch.
 
 Approved by:    jkh
 -- 
 "It's always funny until someone gets hurt. Then it's hilarious."
 
 Crist J. Clark                     |     cjclark@alum.mit.edu
                                    |     cjclark@jhu.edu
 http://people.freebsd.org/~cjc/    |     cjc@freebsd.org

From: Jim Overholt <overholt@cisco.com>
To: cjclark@alum.mit.edu
Cc: overholt@cisco.com (Jim Overholt),
	mike_makonnen@yahoo.com (Mike Makonnen),
	freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: misc/33806: stable supfile get you release, should get stable
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 14:28:27 -0800 (PST)

 > 
 > On Sat, Jan 12, 2002 at 11:30:51AM -0800, Jim Overholt wrote:
 > > 
 > > but the standard supfile also points to RELENG_4.
 > > 
 > > in fact the only difference between the 2 is comments, so why have 2.
 > > supfile-standard will not get current, it will also get RELENG_4.
 > 
 > revision 1.17.2.2
 > date: 2001/04/11 21:50:13;  author: nik;  state: Exp;  lines: +2 -2
 > Consensus on -stable (and #fightclub) is that "standard-supfile" should
 > default to the branch from which the code came.  So if you pull down
 > RELENG_4 it defaults to RELENG_4, get -current and 'tag=.'.  And when
 > we get the 'bug fix only' branch for 4.3, standard-supfile on that
 > branch should point specifically at that branch.
 > 
 > Approved by:    jkh
 
 that makes sense, one time i installed 4.x and cvsuped using -standard and got
 5.0 -- so that was a good fix.  the issue i see is that this is a chicken
 before the egg problem, i have to cvsup to get the new file, so i can use it to
 update to get the code that i want.
 
 oh -- i noticed that ntpdate doesn't update the clock on 3 machines i recently
 installed, i installed 4.4 and updated (make update world + mergemaster) to
 4.5-PRERELEASE.  my clocks drift.  if i manually run 'ntpdate -b overholt-gw'
 is updates the clock.  is this a known issue?  i'm updating one of the machines
 again now to see if it is fixed.
 
 grep ntp /etc/rc.conf
 ntpdate_enable="YES"
 ntpdate_flags="-b overholt-gw"
 
 thanks,
 
 jim
 
 
 
 > -- 
 > "It's always funny until someone gets hurt. Then it's hilarious."
 > 
 > Crist J. Clark                     |     cjclark@alum.mit.edu
 >                                    |     cjclark@jhu.edu
 > http://people.freebsd.org/~cjc/    |     cjc@freebsd.org
 > 
 > 
 
>Unformatted:
