Please don't top-post. > On Sun, Feb 22, 2004 at 01:42:32AM -0800, Kent Stewart wrote: > > On Saturday 21 February 2004 11:24 pm, jsha wrote: > > > hello. > > > > > > does make world leave obsolete files on your system > > > after install? without even the slightest effort to > > > remove them? > > > > > > please say it isn't so. i like make world. > > > > > > > Worse, it is known to cause fatal situations where you have to use the > > fixit disk to recover your system or do a reinstall. If you upgrade a > > kernel that panics, you will be committed to using the bad build. The > > installworld being run after the installkernel and reboot to single > > user mode is for your protection. > > > > FWIW, even installworld leaves obsolete files on your system at various > > times. > > > > Kent
jsha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > damn, this sounds bad. > > so what, freebsd from scratch is the only way to avoid this? > > and how come make/install world is made like that? shouldn't > the developers try to avoid this kind of thing? Following the documented upgrade path (including checking UPDATING for any "special" actions needed at a particular point) will avoid having an unbootable system. Kent Stewart was explaining why using "make world" is less safe than using the documented procedure. And having a few obsolete files left behind is not generally a problem. It's possible to find some and weed them out, but it's not worth worrying about. _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
