> On 16. Jul 2021, at 19:38, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 6:14 AM Thomas Laus wrote:
>
>> Group:
>>
>> This is an issue for more than just CURRENT. The 'usr/src/UPDATING'
>> file has the instructions for updating the ZFS bootblocks but not the
>> EFI partition. I recent
On 7/16/21 1:35 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> There should be. Yes. Last time I went hunting for a place to shoe-horn it
> in, I got distracted by something else.
>
> The instructions are relatively straight forward. I'm writing them here for
> your benefit, and also in case someone wants to send me
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 6:14 AM Thomas Laus wrote:
> Group:
>
> This is an issue for more than just CURRENT. The 'usr/src/UPDATING'
> file has the instructions for updating the ZFS bootblocks but not the
> EFI partition. I recently upgraded a RELEASE-12.2 to RELEASE-13.0. The
> freebsd-update
On 16/07/2021 16:50, Cameron Katri via freebsd-current wrote:
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 09:01:49AM -0600, Alan Somers wrote:
FreeBSD has always placed /usr/local/X after /usr/X in the default PATH.
AFAICT that convention began with SVN revision 37 "Initial import of 386BSD
0.1 othersrc/etc". Why
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 10:46 AM Ian Lepore wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-07-16 at 09:01 -0600, Alan Somers wrote:
> > FreeBSD has always placed /usr/local/X after /usr/X in the default PATH.
> > AFAICT that convention began with SVN revision 37 "Initial import of
> 386BSD
> > 0.1 othersrc/etc". Why is
On Fri, 2021-07-16 at 09:01 -0600, Alan Somers wrote:
> FreeBSD has always placed /usr/local/X after /usr/X in the default PATH.
> AFAICT that convention began with SVN revision 37 "Initial import of 386BSD
> 0.1 othersrc/etc". Why is that? It would make sense to me that
> /usr/local/X should com
>
>
> On Fri, 16 Jul 2021 09:01:49 -0600
> Alan Somers wrote:
>
> > FreeBSD has always placed /usr/local/X after /usr/X in the default
> > PATH. AFAICT that convention began with SVN revision 37 "Initial
> > import of 386BSD 0.1 othersrc/etc". Why is that? It would make
> > sense to me that /
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 10:11:41AM -0600, Alan Somers wrote:
> Ugh, that's a good example. I was thinking more about interactive
> programs, like say /usr/bin/vi vs editors/vim. Hypothetically how would
> one solve the conflict if /usr/local/bin came before /usr/bin ? Install
> binutils's binari
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 9:54 AM Cameron Katri via freebsd-current <
freebsd-current@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 09:01:49AM -0600, Alan Somers wrote:
> > FreeBSD has always placed /usr/local/X after /usr/X in the default PATH.
> > AFAICT that convention began with SVN revision 37
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 09:01:49AM -0600, Alan Somers wrote:
> FreeBSD has always placed /usr/local/X after /usr/X in the default PATH.
> AFAICT that convention began with SVN revision 37 "Initial import of 386BSD
> 0.1 othersrc/etc". Why is that? It would make sense to me that
> /usr/local/X sho
On Fri, 16 Jul 2021 09:01:49 -0600
Alan Somers wrote:
> FreeBSD has always placed /usr/local/X after /usr/X in the default
> PATH. AFAICT that convention began with SVN revision 37 "Initial
> import of 386BSD 0.1 othersrc/etc". Why is that? It would make
> sense to me that /usr/local/X shoul
FreeBSD has always placed /usr/local/X after /usr/X in the default PATH.
AFAICT that convention began with SVN revision 37 "Initial import of 386BSD
0.1 othersrc/etc". Why is that? It would make sense to me that
/usr/local/X should come first. That way programs installed from ports can
override
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 3:15 PM Thomas Laus wrote:
>
> Since CURRENT receives more updates to the EFI boot loader than the
> release versions, there should be instructions in the CURRENT
> 'usr/src/UPDATING' file on how to update the EFI bootcode.
>
Old systems have little efi part 800K or smalle
Group:
This is an issue for more than just CURRENT. The 'usr/src/UPDATING'
file has the instructions for updating the ZFS bootblocks but not the
EFI partition. I recently upgraded a RELEASE-12.2 to RELEASE-13.0. The
freebsd-update procedure did not upgrade the ZFS bootblocks. I forgot
that thi
14 matches
Mail list logo
