Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 13:44:13 -0500 From: "Louis A. Mamakos" <louie@TransSys.COM> To: Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Update UPDATING for upgrade path from 3.4 (was Re: Major upgrade)... Message-ID: <200103141844.f2EIiDa94786@whizzo.transsys.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 14 Mar 2001 10:14:15 PST." <20010314101415.B48101@rand.tgd.net> References: <000e01c0ac9d$abd50040$fd03a8c0@ws001> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0103141046090.80225-100000@utterlux.hq.communitconnect.com> <20010314101415.B48101@rand.tgd.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I've done this upgrade a few times and tried going from 3.4 -> > 4.X: not so smooth. In fact, big sink whole for time, however, 3.4 -> > 3.5-STABLE -> 4.X works very nicely. Having spent a chunk of time > upgrading 30+ boxes, going to 3.5 works well, but takes more time than > backing up and restoring after a fresh 4.X build. ::grin:: > > At anyrate, would it be possible to have someone not this in > UPGRADING? 3.4 -> 4.X == bad, but 3.4 -> 3.5 -> 4.X == good? It > would've saved me a large chunk of time, esp since the only doc I > found that had a hit of this was Ralf's email (very useful, btw. > Thanks!). -sc It's not *required* that you upgrade from sources. I upgraded an ancient 3.0-CURRENT machine to 4.2 by doing a binary "upgrade" from the 4.2 CDROM. Many of the bootstrapping issues are avoided in this way. From there, I could rebuilt applications as required, do a 'make buildworld' to stay "stable", etc. louie To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200103141844.f2EIiDa94786>