10.0-BETA2, why it is late...

To keep everyone informed on what is taking so long with 10.0-BETA2,
here is where we stand at the time of this writing:

 - A problem was found after freebsd-update(8) builds were finished for
   10.0-BETA1 which, because of a file within contrib/openpam containing
   a tilde ('~'), would cause freebsd-update(8) to error when updating
   a system.  This is a problem that was discovered during the
   9.2-RELEASE cycle, but worked around for that release cycle.  A more
   permanent fix has been committed to head/, and merged to stable/10.

 - During testing of the fix for the openpam filename problem, it was
   discovered that order in which freebsd-update(8) would install files
   to the new directory '/usr/lib/private' collided with the creation of
   the '/usr/lib/private' directory.  This caused some shared libraries
   ('.so.N') files to attempt installation prior to the existence of the
   directory, which would cause an error.

 - Since between 9.x and 10.x, libc.so is a "regular" file (not
   a symlink to a shared library), freebsd-update(8) thought
   '/usr/lib/libc.so' was a shared library that should be
   removed/replaced as part of the upgrade.  This caused the removal of
   '/usr/lib/libc.so', and subsequently, unfortunate side-effects.

 - CTF was found to be leaking build-host information into the resulting
   release build.  Specifically, lines 130-133 define 'VERSION' as
   'uname -srp', if otherwise unset.  The negative effect of this is, in
   the event the release build machine and the freebsd-update build
   machine are out of sync (userland and kernel), the freebsd-update(8)
   run to upgrade a system would unnecessarily update everything within
   /boot/kernel/.

It has been pointed out that r257136 to stable/10 has an unfortunate
side effect of warning output from make(1) during the 'make delete-old'
and 'make delete-old-libs'.  Unfortunately, the fix for the CTF
pollution is unclear at this point, but this will be correctly fixed.
For 10.0-BETA2, we will need to ignore the messy output for now.  I do
not like it either, to be honest.

Please keep in mind:  This is *not*, by any evaluation, fault of
freebsd-update(8).  This is the natural progression of software, and
these issues are result of infrastructural changes on multiple levels.

Please bear with us; we'll have 10.0-BETA2 started soon.

Glen