[nycbug-talk] two FreeBSD questions

[George Rosamond]

Charles Sprickman:
> On Oct 15, 2013, at 9:22 PM, George Rosamond wrote:
> 
>> Glen Barber:
>>> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 08:29:00PM -0400, George Rosamond wrote:
>>>> 1.  I don't see the svn revision number in my uname with -a on 9.2 or
>>>> -CURRENT.  Apparently others do.  Anyone else?  Why?
>>>>
>>>
>>> What does 'svn info /usr/src' say?
>>
>> nothing!  I'm using the nyc*bug-pleasing tool called net/svnup ;)
>>
>> hirren on IRC said he sees the svn revision number in his uname -a, but
>> says he didn't see it when things like world and kernel are out of sync,
>> which is likely the case with the 9.2 box.
>>
>> Not having svn installed... that might matter?  Neither has svn installed.
>>
>>>
>>>> 2.  Now that FreeBSD CURRENT hit 11, do any FBSD devs know if the
>>>> bleeding edge arm stuff is only hitting 11, or will 10 get the same
>>>> attention with arm?
>>>>
>>>
>>> "It depends."  stable/10 will definitely have attention in these areas,
>>> but changes that affect KBI (kernel binary interface) cannot be merged
>>> from head/ to stable/10.
>>
>> right.  So the project will maintain 8.x, 9.x, 10.x and focus on 11.x?
>>
>> Here we go again!
>>
>> ;)
>>
>> Why the rush to 11 for HEAD?
> 
> I'd love for someone to continue/expand this list of major
> changes/features:
> 
> * 1.x -> 2.x 	??
> * 2.x.x		introduction of CAM in 2.2.8(?), which was awesome
> * 2.x -> 3.x	SMP introduced
> * 3.x -> 4.x	SMP improved, "the release which will not die", better threading(?), jails
> * 4.x -> 5.x	SMPng, ELF, pf (5.3), more architectures, UFS2, bootloader changes(?)
> * 5.x -> 6.x	amd64 in the .0 release, general stability, ?
> * 6.x -> 7.x	ULE, multiple jail IPs, and that's about all I remember
> * 7.x -> 8.x	production zfs, new USB stack, AHCI

I was thinking the same thing Spork.

8.x -> 9.x gpt (and adding complexity to geom), svn from cvs (not really
branch-related though)
9.x -> 10.x arm to tier 2(?), pkgng, clang/llvm

> 
> Clearly I'm an old fart, as I get a bit lost after 8.x, and I know
> very little about any major changes beyond 6.x.  :) There used to be
> an (accidental?) pattern - up until 7.x, where the odd-numbered
> releases were scary and short-lived and the even-numbered releases
> would not die (3.x was cool, but scary, as was 5.x).  I still have
> quite the soft spot for 4.11.
> 

That reminds me of someone who once told me if he slept for an even
amount of hours, he slept well, no matter how long.  And he never slept
well with an odd number of hours.

Yes, 4.11 was dreamy.

> Totally a gut feeling, but I'd think you'd want at least 10.1 or
> 10.2 before talking too much about 11.x.  Damn you, Mozilla!

That's the logical thought, but when using arm as the platform, it's not
as straight-forward an answer IMHO.

Yes, FreeBSD should adopt ESRs!  We could make 4.12 the extended service
release!

;)

> 
> On the upside, as we approach the point of there being 4 active
> releases out at one time, we can be thankful that we have numbered
> releases and that there are no names like "Crack-Addled Chipmunk",
> "Hallucinating Hedgehog", "Lactating Llama", or "Flatulent Ferret".
> freebsd-questions@ would simply melt down if the project had taken
> that route.

Oh, yes.  Very true.  Did you think of those yourself or are those
actual upcoming Debian nicknames?  Nothing surprises me anymore.

g