On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Tony Abernethy <t...@servasoftware.com> wrote:
> The error message(s) you are suppressing (or maybe didn't see) > > About the only way you can get some files but not all files > from a tarball is some fatal error in the extraction of the > tarball. Any such error tends to give an error message. > I don't think this list likes to play guessing games as to exactly > what mistakes you have made or what evidence you are suppressing. Oh, how beautiful! This is a sign of mutual trust. I documented everything from the first pfctl after reboot from upgrade not working, for what I am chided; and still, I am supposed to 'suppress evidence'. How nice of you! And if I present a serial log, I will have been suspected to have tempered with it? No, that seriously turns me off. I have given everything in detail that I came across, I have not been silent about any additional message, any unusual activity. I have stated a few times that I followed the upgrade procedure to the dot, I have confirmed that nothing unusual showed. Over. I might have made some mistake, yes. Even though these same boxes have been upgraded since 3.8, nevermind. I could at all times have made a mistake or overlooked something. But to start kind of asking for 'proof', that's what's ridiculous, to cite Theo. I am willing to give individuals unprivileged access to the boxes, I did this before, to look around. When you have a box that is relevant to your company, and you are responsible for it, and you noticed something unusual, why would you not want to come screaming to the list (like it did, my excuses), to look for help, but 'conveniently avoid' mentioning that serious error message during the upgrade? You need the box to be up and running, and adding this error message can only help; so why would you suppress it, maybe preventing efficient help to be offered? I fully agree that what I report sounds highly unlikely. But it is true, and by now I confirmed exactly the same having happened on that other box (i386), If I suppressed anything, why should I add to the improbability? Yes, it happened, and I applied the same method and have by now tar xzvphf-ed the 70+ sbin-files that were there and - identically to the previous amd64 - are from version 4.6. It is not excluded, as I wrote earlier, that the upgrade itself does everything 100% correct. Who knows, there can always be a rogue package. Not that I'm saying this has happened, but theoretically, any package could contain 4.6-files and write them back at pkg_add. Uwe
