On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 05:29:51PM GMT, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > Hi Raf, Hi Ingo,
> Raf Czlonka wrote on Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 04:51:12PM +0000: > > > If you take enough care, i.e. make sure you follow current.html[0] > > and the update guide once it becomes available[1] after 5.9 gets > > released, > > To go to 5.9-release or 5.9-stable, upgrade59.html is sufficient. > There is no need to bother with current.html. I'm aware of that. I only mentioned current.html "just in case" anyone reads this email in the future, when one snapshot introduced a change and, some time later, next one reversed it. If you were to upgrade from the *earlier* snapshot (the one which introduced a change) to -release, you would need to make sure to make sure you upgrade to the later snapshot (the one which reverted the change) or, if possible, do it "by hand", prior to upgrading to -release as you wouldn't see the change ever taking place if you simply followed -release/stable -> -release. But, as you can see, this is a bit verbose and, probably, too far-fetched a edge case - wanted to keep it short :^) > You always need current.html when building -current from source, > and you often need it when upgrading to a new -current snapshot. > > > Obviously, this is *not* a supported upgrade path so, if anything > > goes wrong, you're on your own. > > Not true. Upgrading from X-current to (X+1)-stable is supported. The fact that it's not mentioned as an option in the install or upgrade part of the FAQ[0] and a paragraph in the FAQ[1] (which admittedly I had read ages ago and then, it seems, misunderstood): One should also understand that the upgrade process is supported in only one direction: from older to newer, and from -stable to -current. You can not run -current (or a snapshot), then decide you are living too dangerously, and step back to -stable. You are on your own if you choose any path other than the supported option of reloading your system from scratch. Do not expect assistance from the OpenBSD development team. both made me think it is not - I stand corrected. > The amount of confusion here is amazing... :-( Probably because the documentation isn't particularly clear about it - sure, I can do it without any problems, but the fact that it isn't explicitly mentioned made me thing it is not, at the very least, "endorsed". > Yours, > Ingo Thanks for clarifying, Raf [0] http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq5.html#BldBinary [1] http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq5.html#Flavors
