On Wed, Oct 9, 2013, at 8:36, Eduardo Morras wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Oct 2013 21:32:39 -0600 (MDT)
> Mike Brown wrote:
>
> > alexus wrote:
> > > ok, I just did fetch & install and got bumped from p5 to p9
> > >
> > > # uname -a
> > > FreeBSD XX.X.org 7.4-RELEASE-p9 FreeBSD 7.4-RELEASE-p9 #0: Mon
Eduardo Morras wrote:
> [...] uname -a should give the correct answer. Has uname other utility than
> show information about the operating system implementation? No, and it must
> be accurate.
That's what I thought, but when I asked about it here last year, I was told
that this is the way thing
Mike Brown:
$ grep ^BRANCH /usr/src/sys/conf/newvers.sh
BRANCH="RELEASE-p12"
$
then again, I used freebsd-update and not /usr/src, but it makes sense what
you said with kernel, so I guess I _AM_ on the latest -p12 and kernel is on
-p9 as there was no changes after that to kernel.
thank you.
O
On Tue, 8 Oct 2013 21:32:39 -0600 (MDT)
Mike Brown wrote:
> alexus wrote:
> > ok, I just did fetch & install and got bumped from p5 to p9
> >
> > # uname -a
> > FreeBSD XX.X.org 7.4-RELEASE-p9 FreeBSD 7.4-RELEASE-p9 #0: Mon Jun 11
> > 19:47:58 UTC 2012
> > r...@amd64-builder.daemonology.net:
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013, at 22:32, Mike Brown wrote:
> alexus wrote:
> > ok, I just did fetch & install and got bumped from p5 to p9
> >
> > # uname -a
> > FreeBSD XX.X.org 7.4-RELEASE-p9 FreeBSD 7.4-RELEASE-p9 #0: Mon Jun 11
> > 19:47:58 UTC 2012
> > r...@amd64-builder.daemonology.net:/usr/obj/us
alexus wrote:
> ok, I just did fetch & install and got bumped from p5 to p9
>
> # uname -a
> FreeBSD XX.X.org 7.4-RELEASE-p9 FreeBSD 7.4-RELEASE-p9 #0: Mon Jun 11
> 19:47:58 UTC 2012
> r...@amd64-builder.daemonology.net:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC
> amd64
> #
>
> can I take it all the way t
it didn't help..
# freebsd-update fetch
Looking up update.FreeBSD.org mirrors... 5 mirrors found.
Fetching metadata signature for 7.4-RELEASE from update6.freebsd.org...
done.
Fetching metadata index... done.
Inspecting system... done.
Preparing to download files... done.
The following files are
ok, I just did fetch & install and got bumped from p5 to p9
# uname -a
FreeBSD XX.X.org 7.4-RELEASE-p9 FreeBSD 7.4-RELEASE-p9 #0: Mon Jun 11
19:47:58 UTC 2012
r...@amd64-builder.daemonology.net:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC
amd64
#
can I take it all the way to -p12? (I'm running fetch again,
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013, at 14:22, alexus wrote:
> bash-4.2# freebsd-update upgrade -r 7.4-RELEASE-p12
Just freebsd-update fetch && freebsd-update install is all you should
have to run. The -r flag is for jumping major releases (from 7.x to 8.x,
for example).
I can't comment on whether or not the fre
On Mon, 7 Oct 2013 15:22:17 -0400
alexus wrote:
> bash-4.2# freebsd-update upgrade -r 7.4-RELEASE-p12
> Is there a way to upgrade 7.4-RELEASE-p5 to 7.4-RELEASE-p12 using
> freebsd-update now?
What about:
# freebsd-update fetch
# freebsd-update install
http://www.freebsd.org/security/
Andreas
> Fetching 1 metadata files... 70.5%
> done.
> 70.5%
> 70.5%
> 74.2%
> 74.2%
> 81.7%
> 81.7%
> 70.5%
I think this is a result of having "-v" in my GZIP environment variable.
I always forget about my GZIP and BZIP2 variables. I should've known.
So, never mind about that.
___
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:22:41AM +0200, Wolfgang Riegler wrote:
> Hi,
>
> since last freebsd-update fetch install I always get this message after
> freebsd-update fetch:
>
> The following files will be updated as part of updating to 9.1-RELEASE-p3:
> /boot/kernel/linker.hints
>
> but freebsd-
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 11:14:06 -0400 (EDT), Daniel Feenberg wrote:
> This is written as though it applies to FreeBSD, but I was
> under the impression that FreeBSD didn't do anything with
> /etc/issue.
It actually works quite well, I'm using it for decades. :-)
You just need to add the item "if=/et
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013, Polytropon wrote:
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 07:37:01 -0400 (EDT), Daniel Feenberg wrote:
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote:
The problem under discussion is that the kernel version does not
change when a freebsd-update update does not include a kernel ch
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 07:37:01 -0400 (EDT), Daniel Feenberg wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2013, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote:
>
> >
> > The problem under discussion is that the kernel version does not
> > change when a freebsd-update update does not include a kernel change.
> >
>
> Perhaps we could
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote:
The problem under discussion is that the kernel version does not
change when a freebsd-update update does not include a kernel change.
Perhaps we could adopt the Linux practice of placing the release
information in /etc/issue
Daniel
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 13:43:03 +1000
Da Rock wrote:
> Interesting. My only observation was that sysctl is supposed to be the
> 'system' database where all queries relate to. It is supposed to display
> everything about the system; therefore any of these data bits should be
> fixed here first. An
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 08:43:59 +1000
Da Rock wrote:
> On 04/25/13 06:31, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote:
> > On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:52:17 -0500
> > "Mark Felder" wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:34:30 -0500, Steve O'Hara-Smith
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> You have updated to 9.1-RELEASE-p2 - but since
On 04/25/13 13:32, Mike. wrote:
On 4/25/2013 at 4:47 AM Polytropon wrote:
|On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 22:32:17 -0400, Mike. wrote:
|> If uname -r [-a] does not give the proper version of the OS, then it
is
|> either a bug, or the documentation for uname should be changed.
|> Currently, the man page for
On 4/25/2013 at 4:47 AM Polytropon wrote:
|On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 22:32:17 -0400, Mike. wrote:
|> If uname -r [-a] does not give the proper version of the OS, then it
is
|> either a bug, or the documentation for uname should be changed.
|> Currently, the man page for uname gives the following option:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 22:32:17 -0400, Mike. wrote:
> If uname -r [-a] does not give the proper version of the OS, then it is
> either a bug, or the documentation for uname should be changed.
> Currently, the man page for uname gives the following option:
>
> -r Write the current release level o
On 4/24/2013 at 5:07 PM Mike Brown wrote:
|Da Rock wrote:
|> sysctl kern.version
|
|For me, that's the same info as in uname -a.
|
|Try this:
|
|grep -v # /usr/src/sys/conf/newvers.sh | head -4
=
If uname -r [-a] does not give the proper version of the OS, then it is
either a bug, o
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 21:13:56 -0500, Mark Felder wrote:
> The point is that the uname and sysctl output is inaccurate. If the
> latest release is -p6 and the kernel hasn't been touched since -p4, both
> uname and the sysctl only show -p4. It's impossible to tell otherwise
> that the system is really
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013, at 20:41, Da Rock wrote:
> On 04/25/13 09:07, Mike Brown wrote:
> > Da Rock wrote:
> >> sysctl kern.version
> > For me, that's the same info as in uname -a.
> >
> > Try this:
> >
> > grep -v # /usr/src/sys/conf/newvers.sh | head -4
> That shows even less. But the point of the
On 04/25/13 09:07, Mike Brown wrote:
Da Rock wrote:
sysctl kern.version
For me, that's the same info as in uname -a.
Try this:
grep -v # /usr/src/sys/conf/newvers.sh | head -4
That shows even less. But the point of the OP was having a file in etc
with the info on version, which I fell could
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013, at 18:07, Mike Brown wrote:
> Da Rock wrote:
> > sysctl kern.version
>
> For me, that's the same info as in uname -a.
>
> Try this:
>
> grep -v # /usr/src/sys/conf/newvers.sh | head -4
>
Not useful if you don't have src on your servers, but that's good to
know.
___
Da Rock wrote:
> sysctl kern.version
For me, that's the same info as in uname -a.
Try this:
grep -v # /usr/src/sys/conf/newvers.sh | head -4
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To u
On 04/25/13 06:31, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:52:17 -0500
"Mark Felder" wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:34:30 -0500, Steve O'Hara-Smith
wrote:
You have updated to 9.1-RELEASE-p2 - but since there have been no
kernel changes since 9.1-RELEASE the kernel version message ha
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:52:17 -0500
"Mark Felder" wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:34:30 -0500, Steve O'Hara-Smith
> wrote:
>
> > You have updated to 9.1-RELEASE-p2 - but since there have been no
> > kernel changes since 9.1-RELEASE the kernel version message hasn't
> > changed.
> > This could
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:52:17 -0500, Mark Felder wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:34:30 -0500, Steve O'Hara-Smith
> wrote:
>
>> You have updated to 9.1-RELEASE-p2 - but since there have been no
>> kernel changes since 9.1-RELEASE the kernel version message hasn't
>> changed.
>> This could very rea
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 19:35:01 +0200, Alexandre wrote:
> Freebsd-update tool apply binary patches to your -RELEASE system and
> GENERIC kernel.
> Furthermore, sources are synced too (/usr/src) by default.
> If you want to see the -p# increased, you have to recompile your GENERIC
> kernel.
> If you a
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:34:30 -0500, Steve O'Hara-Smith
wrote:
You have updated to 9.1-RELEASE-p2 - but since there have been no
kernel changes since 9.1-RELEASE the kernel version message hasn't
changed.
This could very reasonably be regarded as bug in the update/version
reporting process
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:00:47 + (UTC)
Walter Hurry wrote:
> When I issue 'freebsd-update fetch install I see this:
>
> Looking up update.FreeBSD.org mirrors... 3 mirrors found.
> Fetching metadata signature for 9.1-RELEASE from update5.freebsd.org...
>
On Wednesday, April 24, 2013, Walter Hurry wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 18:05:04 +0200, Polytropon wrote:
>
> > The kernel's version message will only change if the _kernel_ has been
> > receiving changes. So, for example, if you update from 9.1 to 9.1-p2,
> > and _no_ change has been written to t
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 18:05:04 +0200, Polytropon wrote:
> The kernel's version message will only change if the _kernel_ has been
> receiving changes. So, for example, if you update from 9.1 to 9.1-p2,
> and _no_ change has been written to the kernel, it will still report
> 9.1, even though the updat
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:00:47 + (UTC), Walter Hurry wrote:
> When I issue 'freebsd-update fetch install I see this:
>
> Looking up update.FreeBSD.org mirrors... 3 mirrors found.
> Fetching metadata signature for 9.1-RELEASE from update5.freebsd.org...
>
Paul Macdonald writes:
> On 01/02/2013 22:50, Carl Johnson wrote:
>> Gökşin Akdeniz writes:
>>
>>> Fri, 01 Feb 2013 11:51:41 -0800 tarihinde
>>> Carl Johnson yazmış:
Does anybody have any suggestions on what might have happened and what
can be done?
>>> Hello Carl,
>>>
>>> What d
On 01/02/2013 22:50, Carl Johnson wrote:
Gökşin Akdeniz writes:
Fri, 01 Feb 2013 11:51:41 -0800 tarihinde
Carl Johnson yazmış:
Does anybody have any suggestions on what might have happened and what
can be done?
Hello Carl,
What does "# uname -a" or "# uname -r" output says?
It still show
Carl Johnson writes:
> Kevin Kinsey writes:
>
>> On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 11:51:41AM -0800, Carl Johnson wrote:
>>> I ran freebsd-update to update my 8.1-RELEASE system to 8.3-RELEASE
>>> (freebsd-update -r 8.3-RELEASE upgrade). It downloaded a bunch of
>>> files, asked me to edit some configura
On 01/02/2013 22:50, Carl Johnson wrote:
Gökşin Akdeniz writes:
Fri, 01 Feb 2013 11:51:41 -0800 tarihinde
Carl Johnson yazmış:
Does anybody have any suggestions on what might have happened and what
can be done?
Hello Carl,
What does "# uname -a" or "# uname -r" output says?
It still show
Gökşin Akdeniz writes:
> Fri, 01 Feb 2013 11:51:41 -0800 tarihinde
> Carl Johnson yazmış:
>>
>> Does anybody have any suggestions on what might have happened and what
>> can be done?
>>
>
> Hello Carl,
>
> What does "# uname -a" or "# uname -r" output says?
It still shows 8.1, but another pos
Kevin Kinsey writes:
> On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 11:51:41AM -0800, Carl Johnson wrote:
>> I ran freebsd-update to update my 8.1-RELEASE system to 8.3-RELEASE
>> (freebsd-update -r 8.3-RELEASE upgrade). It downloaded a bunch of
>> files, asked me to edit some configuration files, showed me long lis
Fri, 01 Feb 2013 11:51:41 -0800 tarihinde
Carl Johnson yazmış:
>
> Does anybody have any suggestions on what might have happened and what
> can be done?
>
Hello Carl,
What does "# uname -a" or "# uname -r" output says?
--
Gökşin Akdeniz
pgpxkVgruffrn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 11:51:41AM -0800, Carl Johnson wrote:
> I ran freebsd-update to update my 8.1-RELEASE system to 8.3-RELEASE
> (freebsd-update -r 8.3-RELEASE upgrade). It downloaded a bunch of
> files, asked me to edit some configuration files, showed me long lists
> of files that have been
Joe Altman wrote:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 03:50:44PM +0100, Martin Laabs wrote:
Hi,
On 01/02/13 01:21, Joe Altman wrote:
Greetings, list. I have the following error; though I can load
update5.FreeBSD.org in a browser:
[...]
maybe you use a release that is not supported by freebsd-update. Run
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 03:50:44PM +0100, Martin Laabs wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 01/02/13 01:21, Joe Altman wrote:
> > Greetings, list. I have the following error; though I can load
> > update5.FreeBSD.org in a browser:
> > [...]
>
> maybe you use a release that is not supported by freebsd-update. Run
Hi,
On 01/02/13 01:21, Joe Altman wrote:
> Greetings, list. I have the following error; though I can load
> update5.FreeBSD.org in a browser:
> [...]
maybe you use a release that is not supported by freebsd-update. Run "uname
-r" an compare the release with that you see when looking at
http://upd
Hi,
On 01/02/13 01:21, Joe Altman wrote:
> Greetings, list. I have the following error; though I can load
> update5.FreeBSD.org in a browser:
> [...]
maybe you use a release that is not supported by freebsd-update. Run "uname
-r" an compare the release with that you see when looking at
http://upd
On 02/01/2013 20:55, Paul Schmehl wrote:
> I wasn't thinking when I wrote this. Freebsd-update pulls *binary*
> copies of files, so you're not ever going to get the src files to
> rebuild your kernel from freebsd-update. You need to pull those in
> using svn.
Not so. Take a look at /etc/freebsd
--On January 2, 2013 1:46:25 PM -0600 Paul Schmehl
wrote:
--On January 2, 2013 8:18:38 PM +0100 andreas scherrer
wrote:
on 2.1.13 19:15 Paul Schmehl said the following:
--On January 2, 2013 6:45:50 PM +0100 andreas scherrer
And from experience this is what it will do: replace
/boot/kerne
--On January 2, 2013 8:18:38 PM +0100 andreas scherrer
wrote:
on 2.1.13 19:15 Paul Schmehl said the following:
--On January 2, 2013 6:45:50 PM +0100 andreas scherrer
And from experience this is what it will do: replace /boot/kernel/kernel
which is my custom kernel with a GENERIC kernel.
As
On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 11:18 AM, andreas scherrer wrote:
This is no longer true, though it was true at the time that was written...
-
> However, freebsd-update will detect and update the GENERIC kernel in
> /boot/GENERIC (if it exists), even if it is not the current (running)
> kernel of the
on 2.1.13 19:15 Paul Schmehl said the following:
> --On January 2, 2013 6:45:50 PM +0100 andreas scherrer
>> And from experience this is what it will do: replace /boot/kernel/kernel
>> which is my custom kernel with a GENERIC kernel.
>>
>> As it seems that freebsd-update works by comparing a hash
The confusion comes from the fact that the original behavior of
freebsd-update was NOT to update the kernel binaries if a custom kernel was
detected.
FYI my /etc/freebsd-update.conf has
# Components of the base system which should be kept updated.
#Components src world kernel
Components src world
--On January 2, 2013 6:45:50 PM +0100 andreas scherrer
wrote:
Hi
This can be considered a follow up to the message "How to keep
freebsd-update from trashing custom kernel?" sent to this list by Brett
Glass on August 13th 2012 (see [1]). Unfortunately there is no solution
to the problem in tha
On Sun, 25 Nov 2012 12:06:06 +, Karl Pielorz wrote:
>
>
> --On 22 November 2012 17:41 +0100 Polytropon wrote:
>
> >> I'm looking at switching to 'freebsd-update' - is there an equivalent
> >> way to get it to update me to '-STABLE'?
> >
> > No. The freebsd-update program can only be used t
--On 22 November 2012 17:41 +0100 Polytropon wrote:
I'm looking at switching to 'freebsd-update' - is there an equivalent
way to get it to update me to '-STABLE'?
No. The freebsd-update program can only be used to follow
the RELEASE branch, plus the security updates (RELEASE-pN).
Following
On 11/22/12 17:32, Karl Pielorz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a number of 9.0-R boxes, some of which I've updated in the past
> to 9.0-STABLE (as of the date they were done).
>
> I'm looking at switching to 'freebsd-update' - is there an equivalent
> way to get it to update me to '-STABLE'?
freebsd-
On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 16:32:21 +, Karl Pielorz wrote:
> I'm looking at switching to 'freebsd-update' - is there an equivalent way
> to get it to update me to '-STABLE'?
No. The freebsd-update program can only be used to follow
the RELEASE branch, plus the security updates (RELEASE-pN).
Followin
On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 11:47:02 +0200
Istvan Gabor wrote:
> FreeBSD Handbook (at the end of section 25.2.2) says:
>
> "However, freebsd-update will always update the /usr/src/sys/conf/newvers.sh
> file.
> The current patch level (as indicated by the -p number reported by uname -r)
> is obtained
>
2012. október 8. 17:35 napon Andreas Rudisch <"cyb."@gmx.net> írta:
> On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 16:52:24 +0200
> Istvan Gabor wrote:
>
> > As I remember correctly during the fetch I saw a message that the current
> > patch level is p4.
> > After rebooting the computer uname gives p3 on the updated sy
On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 16:52:24 +0200
Istvan Gabor wrote:
> As I remember correctly during the fetch I saw a message that the current
> patch level is p4.
> After rebooting the computer uname gives p3 on the updated system:
>
> Why does uname reports p3 while freebsd-update indicates p4 state?
Hi,
On Sun, 26 Aug 2012, Walter Hurry wrote:
On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 14:24:34 -0400, doug wrote:
In doing an update from 8.3 --> 9.0 I messed up the merge on /etc/ttys.
This has interesting consequences BTW. Are there any docs on how to do
this?
Here's mine. Note: I changed ttyv8 from off to on as I
On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 14:24:34 -0400, doug wrote:
> In doing an update from 8.3 --> 9.0 I messed up the merge on /etc/ttys.
> This has interesting consequences BTW. Are there any docs on how to do
> this?
Here's mine. Note: I changed ttyv8 from off to on as I am using xdm.
console none
On Thu, 23 Aug 2012 13:49:18 -0400 (EDT), d...@safeport.com wrote:
> After seeing if xorg and twm would just work, I did remove all packages with
> pkg_delete. That did not clear out all of /usr/local.
You can do a manual cleanup of /usr/local, entirely removing it
and then reconstructing its str
On Thu, 23 Aug 2012, Polytropon wrote:
On Thu, 23 Aug 2012 11:36:51 -0400 (EDT), d...@safeport.com wrote:
I wanted to see if I could get an 8.1 system updated to 9.0 (mostly) with
freebsd-update. I did this with a source update to RELENG_8_3 and then did the
standard stuff to get to 9.0
perl a
On Thu, 23 Aug 2012 11:36:51 -0400 (EDT), d...@safeport.com wrote:
> I wanted to see if I could get an 8.1 system updated to 9.0 (mostly) with
> freebsd-update. I did this with a source update to RELENG_8_3 and then did
> the
> standard stuff to get to 9.0
>
> perl and xdm both gave errors that
> If you're building your own customised kernel, why don't you just build the
> entire system from source? I've not used freebsd-update yet and probably
> won't. Is it just a matter of time, i.e. waiting for the compilation to
> finish?
Actually I built this system from source. And now use free
== Denis wrote on Mon 20.Aug'12 at 16:41:56 +0400 ==
> > Then why not follow my suggestion of _letting_ freebsd-update
> > update the kernel, but _use_ a different one instead which it
> > won't touch? In /boot/loader.conf:
> >
> > kernel="mykernel"
> > bootfile="/boot/mykernel/ker
> Then why not follow my suggestion of _letting_ freebsd-update
> update the kernel, but _use_ a different one instead which it
> won't touch? In /boot/loader.conf:
>
> kernel="mykernel"
> bootfile="/boot/mykernel/kernel"
>
> Now freebsd-update can happily alter the default kernel w
On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 14:37:40 +0400, Denis wrote:
> Hi Alexandre,
>
> > Have you rebuilt your custom kernel after ?
> > This is described in the Handbook in the section 25.2.2
> > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/updating-upgrading-freebsdupdate.html
>
> Yes, I rebuilt my
Hi Alexandre,
> Have you rebuilt your custom kernel after ?
> This is described in the Handbook in the section 25.2.2
> http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/updating-upgrading-freebsdupdate.html
Yes, I rebuilt my custom kernel after. But this doesn't help - every
time I run "
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Denis wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have FreeBSD 9.0 (p4) with custom kernel.
>
> "uname -i" says it:
> HOMEWIFI90
>
> However, when I run "freebsd-update fetch" command it would like to
> update my kernel as well:
>
> freebsd-update fetch
> Looking up update.FreeBSD.org m
On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 01:48:18 +0200, Polytropon wrote:
< snip problem and comprehensive answer >
That's really helpful. Very many thanks, Polytropon.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-quest
On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 21:24:37 + (UTC), Walter Hurry wrote:
> Every time I run "freebsd-update fetch" it says it wants to update the
> following 5 source files "as part of updating to 9.0-RELEASE-p4":
>
> /usr/src/sys/amd64/amd64/trap.c
> /usr/src/sys/conf/newvers.sh
> /usr/src/sys/netinet/tcp_
On Mon, 25 Jun 2012 14:12:36 +0100
RW wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Jun 2012 06:53:45 -0500
> Zane C. B-H. wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 25 Jun 2012 12:26:12 +0100
> > RW wrote:
> >
>
> > > freebsd-update doesn't support development branches, you have
> > > to go from security branch to security branch.
> >
>
On Mon, 25 Jun 2012 06:53:45 -0500
Zane C. B-H. wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Jun 2012 12:26:12 +0100
> RW wrote:
>
> > freebsd-update doesn't support development branches, you have to go
> > from security branch to security branch.
>
> I know it can't be used to update to stable, but I've not encounter
On Mon, 25 Jun 2012 12:26:12 +0100
RW wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Jun 2012 04:21:18 -0500
> Zane C. B-H. wrote:
>
> > Howdy!
> >
> > Any one have any idea what is going on below?
> >
> > [root@shiela]/root# uname -a
> > FreeBSD shiela.vulpes.vvelox.net 8.3-PRERELEASE FreeBSD
> > 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Sat
On Mon, 25 Jun 2012 04:21:18 -0500
Zane C. B-H. wrote:
> Howdy!
>
> Any one have any idea what is going on below?
>
> [root@shiela]/root# uname -a
> FreeBSD shiela.vulpes.vvelox.net 8.3-PRERELEASE FreeBSD
> 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Sat Feb 25 04:55:35 CST 2012
> kits...@shiela.vulpes.vvelox.net:/usr/o
Dale Scott skrev 2012-06-14 14:59:
Should I install the libc souces?
I had this error when upgrading 8.x (8.1 to 8.2?), and solved it by creating
the directory only (actual sources not required). I recall someone had
posted this solution to the list at the time.
Regards,
Dale
> Should I install the libc souces?
I had this error when upgrading 8.x (8.1 to 8.2?), and solved it by creating
the directory only (actual sources not required). I recall someone had
posted this solution to the list at the time.
Regards,
Dale
___
fr
2012-06-14 12:18, Matthew Seaman skrev:
On 14/06/2012 10:45, Leslie Jensen wrote:
When I do
freebsd-update install
I get this error:
Installing updates...install: ///usr/src/lib/libc/gen/libc_dlopen.c: No
such file or directory
I think it's because I do not have all sources installed. So I
On 14/06/2012 10:45, Leslie Jensen wrote:
> When I do
>
> freebsd-update install
>
> I get this error:
>
> Installing updates...install: ///usr/src/lib/libc/gen/libc_dlopen.c: No
> such file or directory
>
> I think it's because I do not have all sources installed. So I just want
> to confirm t
On 14/06/2012 10:41, Leslie Jensen wrote:
> When one recives the
>
> FreeBSD Errata Notice or
>
> FreeBSD Security Advisory
>
> The instruction is to do:
>
>
> # freebsd-update fetch
>
> # freebsd-update install
>
>
>
> From earlier discussions on this list about the -px number not changin
I realized I made a couple of wording/clarification errors in my
original message. First just about all of these kernels are not custom
but simply locally compiled with no custom modifications. Second the
locally compiled kernels are all named GENERIC (no custom name).
Ryan
On 6/12/12 2:29 PM, Ry
Resend as I lost cc questions@ by mistake
Ryan Frederick wrote:
> I have several FreeBSD 9 systems with custom compiled kernels. After
> using freebsd-update to go from 9.0-RELEASE-p2 to 9.0-RELEASE-p3 this
> morning I rebuilt the kernels. However after recompiling, installing,
> and reboo
On 03/06/2012 13:00, RW wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 12:47:47 +0100
Chris Whitehouse wrote:
c400# uname -a
FreeBSD c400 9.0-RELEASE FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE #0: Tue Jan 3 07:15:25
UTC 2012
r...@obrian.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC i386
Following the handbook:
c400# freebsd-update -
On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 12:47:47 +0100
Chris Whitehouse wrote:
>
> c400# uname -a
> FreeBSD c400 9.0-RELEASE FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE #0: Tue Jan 3 07:15:25
> UTC 2012
> r...@obrian.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC i386
>
> Following the handbook:
>
> c400# freebsd-update -r 9-STABLE upgra
On Fri, 4 May 2012 16:45:51 -0500 (CDT), Robert Bonomi wrote:
>
> Polytropon wrote:
> >
> > First of all, thanks for explaining your point of view.
> > Allow me to add a few thoughts:
> >
> > On Fri, 4 May 2012 11:44:49 -0500 (CDT), Robert Bonomi wrote:
> > >
> > > Polytropon wrote:
> > > > On
Polytropon wrote:
>
> First of all, thanks for explaining your point of view.
> Allow me to add a few thoughts:
>
> On Fri, 4 May 2012 11:44:49 -0500 (CDT), Robert Bonomi wrote:
> >
> > Polytropon wrote:
> > > On Fri, 4 May 2012 04:14:05 -0500 (CDT), Robert Bonomi wrote:
> > > > What is require
On 4 May 2012, at 16:45, Polytropon wrote:
> On Fri, 4 May 2012 04:14:05 -0500 (CDT), Robert Bonomi wrote:
>> What is required is a differentation between the _kernel_ revision level,
>> and the patchlevel of the entire base system.
>>
>> Store the kernel revision level -in- the kernel. Use th
First of all, thanks for explaining your point of view.
Allow me to add a few thoughts:
On Fri, 4 May 2012 11:44:49 -0500 (CDT), Robert Bonomi wrote:
>
> Polytropon wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 May 2012 04:14:05 -0500 (CDT), Robert Bonomi wrote:
> > > What is required is a differentation between the _ke
On 2012-05-04 10:45, Polytropon wrote:
Allow me to extent the approach: For -STABLE versions (e. g. if
updated per CVS), those files could contain the "build number"
and the date of the currently installed -STABLE "snapshot".
A separation of a "kernel version file" and a "world version
file" is
Polytropon wrote:
> On Fri, 4 May 2012 04:14:05 -0500 (CDT), Robert Bonomi wrote:
> > What is required is a differentation between the _kernel_ revision level,
> > and the patchlevel of the entire base system.
> >
> > Store the kernel revision level -in- the kernel. Use the 'standard'
> > THREE
On Fri, 4 May 2012 04:14:05 -0500 (CDT), Robert Bonomi wrote:
> What is required is a differentation between the _kernel_ revision level,
> and the patchlevel of the entire base system.
>
> Store the kernel revision level -in- the kernel. Use the 'standard'
> THREE-level version numbering {Major
> From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Fri May 4 02:54:56 2012
> Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 08:52:24 +0100
> From: Matthew Seaman
> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: freebsd-update not updating reported patchlevel
>
> On 03/05/2012 23:43, Robert Bonomi wrote
On 03/05/2012 22:52, Mike Brown wrote:
> For example, with this latest OpenSSL security update, running
> 'freebsd-update
> fetch' says (among other things) "The following files will be updated as part
> of updating to 8.2-RELEASE-p7" and "WARNING: FreeBSD 8.2-RELEASE-p3 is
> approaching its En
On 03/05/2012 23:43, Robert Bonomi wrote:
> Amazingly, this very question was covered on this list within the last few
> hours.
It's not that much of a coincidence. We always get a rash of queries
like this every time there's a security advisory and consequently a lot
of people are updating.
Mike Brown wrote;
> I installed 8.2-RELEASE when it was new, and have been just using
> freebsd-update since then. I run freebsd-update whenever there are new
> critical patches. But for some reason, my system's reported patchlevel number
> hasn't updated since p3.
[sneck]
> But 'uname -r' c
Matthew Seaman writes:
> That's a known problem and fixable by first updating your 8.2-RELEASE
> machine to the latest patch level before trying the update to 9.0
It appears to be working now. Thank you.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing
1 - 100 of 320 matches
Mail list logo
