bianual releases

Han Boetes han at
Fri Jul 21 08:01:40 UTC 2006

Mikhail Kolesnik wrote:
> Han Boetes <han at> wrote:
> > regular releases are better for installers so they are quite
> > up to date to start with. And for people who keep tracking
> > updates they are not necessary, all they have to do is change
> > the release tag and rebuild some ports and run rejmerge.
> Once again something inside tells me it's a way towards some
> troubles after 2-3 such updates. Double rebuild of the whole
> system in chrooted environment sounds like an overkill, but what
> is the safe and sane way?

Download the iso and update all the packages the binary
way. They're already build for you.

> Such way a crux-current would be even nicer and simpler to
> follow, but not shure how toolchain changes are implemented, for
> example, in OpenBSD-current.
> Also, they are kernel developers too, while crux only implements
> userspace. There are ~80 active developers working on OpenBSD
> and very few here. So the cycle period is not a trivial thing to
> choose.

You can think up a lot of nonexisting problems. :-)

CRUX is much simpler than OpenBSD, keeping it up to date and
working while testing new stuff is just a hobby of mine, and I bet
it's the same for the other maintainers.

What you get in the meanwhile as an enduser is a linux distro
that's easy to build and maintain.

# Han

More information about the CRUX mailing list