From owner-freebsd-install Mon Sep 25 04:04:30 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id EAA08897 for install-outgoing; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 04:04:30 -0700 Received: from holly.cam.harlequin.co.uk (holly.cam.harlequin.co.uk [193.128.4.58]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id EAA08879 ; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 04:04:21 -0700 Received: from rocannon.cam.harlequin.co.uk by holly.cam.harlequin.co.uk; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 12:04:10 +0100 Received: from [192.88.238.248] (dynamic-mac4.cam.harlequin.co.uk) by rocannon.cam.harlequin.co.uk; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 12:04:07 +0100 X-Sender: richard@mailhost.cam.harlequin.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 12:04:09 +0100 To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-install@freebsd.org, freebsd-question@freebsd.org From: richard@harlequin.co.uk (Richard Brooksby) Subject: Booting FreeBSD from the Windows NT Loader Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk I run my PC with Windows 95, Windows NT, and FreeBSD. I had some problems with the FreeBSD boot selector and Windows 95, so I started investigating other ways to boot. (Has anyone else had problems with Windows 95 and booteasy, by the way?) I discovered that the Windows NT loader can be configured to run other boot sectors from files in the DOS partition. The boot loader's INI file (usually C:\BOOT.INI) just needs to be edited to point at the file containing the sector. DON'T ATTEMPT THIS UNLESS YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING. I think you must be ready to edit partition tables by hand using a sector editor before you start mucking about with them, in general. I've had to do this on several occasions to avoid trashing Windows NT, which is a bit sensitive about them. Make backup copies on floppy disks and make sure you have the utilities to put them back if things should go wrong. To boot FreeBSD from the NT loader, copy your existing boot sector for the FreeBSD partition to a file on the DOS C: drive. Something like this will do the trick: dd if=/dev/wd0c of=/freebsd.sec bs=512 count=1 (Change wd0c to sd0c if you boot from a SCSI disk. You could copy the appropriate file from /usr/mdec instead, but I'm typing this from memory on my Mac and couldn't tell you which ones offhand. Read the manual.) Then alter the BOOT.INI file on C: so it contains a line like this under the "[operating systems]" heading: c:\freebsd.sec="FreeBSD" The NT boot loader will then give you FreeBSD as an option. You can make it the default by editing the "DEFAULT=" line in BOOT.INI in the obvious manner. You can also add other boot sectors for other systems, although I haven't tried it with the Linux LILO boot loader. Once you have this working, you can restore the original master boot record for DOS or Windows 95 use by running "FDISK /MBR" from DOS. You are less likely to have trouble with Windows 95, Windows NT, or OS/2 booting and partitioning if you keep the default MBR. I would be interested to hear from anyone else who uses this trick. Please send me some mail if you try it, successfully or not. FYI, I'm running: - FreeBSD 2.0 with a locally patched kernel - Windows 95 beta (as released on the Microsoft Developer's Network) - Windows NT 3.51 retail version --- Richard Brooksby Manager & Developer / Memory Management / Symbolic Processing / Harlequin +44 1223 873881 (voice) +44 1223 872519 (fax) From owner-freebsd-install Mon Sep 25 04:35:51 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id EAA09359 for install-outgoing; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 04:35:51 -0700 Received: from holly.cam.harlequin.co.uk (holly.cam.harlequin.co.uk [193.128.4.58]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id EAA09354 for ; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 04:35:47 -0700 Received: from rocannon.cam.harlequin.co.uk by holly.cam.harlequin.co.uk; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 12:35:45 +0100 Received: from [192.88.238.248] (dynamic-mac4.cam.harlequin.co.uk) by rocannon.cam.harlequin.co.uk; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 12:35:41 +0100 X-Sender: richard@mailhost.cam.harlequin.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 12:35:44 +0100 To: freebsd-install@freebsd.org From: richard@harlequin.co.uk (Richard Brooksby) Subject: One-line status windows Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk (I'm new to freebsd-install, please forgive me if this point has already been raised.) When the installation program is reporting progress, such as newfs commands, it prints each one in its own dialog box, erasing the previous one, often too fast for the eye to follow. May I suggest that when reporting progress through several commands you use a single window and show the commands one after another? Windows are all very well, but using only 5% of the screen to display information is not a good thing. Thanks for your time. --- Richard Brooksby Manager & Developer / Memory Management / Symbolic Processing / Harlequin +44 1223 873881 (voice) +44 1223 872519 (fax) From owner-freebsd-install Mon Sep 25 04:35:58 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id EAA09382 for install-outgoing; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 04:35:58 -0700 Received: from holly.cam.harlequin.co.uk (holly.cam.harlequin.co.uk [193.128.4.58]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id EAA09376 ; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 04:35:54 -0700 Received: from rocannon.cam.harlequin.co.uk by holly.cam.harlequin.co.uk; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 12:35:51 +0100 Received: from [192.88.238.248] (dynamic-mac4.cam.harlequin.co.uk) by rocannon.cam.harlequin.co.uk; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 12:35:48 +0100 X-Sender: richard@mailhost.cam.harlequin.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 12:35:50 +0100 To: freebsd-install@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org From: richard@harlequin.co.uk (Richard Brooksby) Subject: "Installation" and "upgrade" Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk This is both a question and a suggestion. FreeBSD has a reasonable installation procedure, and the documentation talks a lot about "intalling" FreeBSD. What about upgrading? I have FreeBSD 2.0 installed, and am interested in updating to 2.1 when it is stable and comes out on CD-ROM. Can I use the same convenient installation procedure to _upgrade_? Will the install 2.1 procedure overwrite all my careful configuration in /etc or will it Do The Right Thing? If the install procedure _does_ upgrade correctly, then I suggest the procedure is documented, along with any pitfalls. If the install procedure can't upgrade, I suggest that it be changed to do so, or some documentation is provided on how to do this. I'm pretty sure you have thought of this already -- there must be a lot of people with 2.0 who want to upgrade. I'm impressed by the thoughtfulness and stability of FreeBSD, which is why I use it. Keep up the good work. I wish I had time to pitch in. --- Richard Brooksby Manager & Developer / Memory Management / Symbolic Processing / Harlequin +44 1223 873881 (voice) +44 1223 872519 (fax) From owner-freebsd-install Mon Sep 25 04:44:25 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id EAA09542 for install-outgoing; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 04:44:25 -0700 Received: from holly.cam.harlequin.co.uk (holly.cam.harlequin.co.uk [193.128.4.58]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id EAA09537 for ; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 04:44:20 -0700 Received: from rocannon.cam.harlequin.co.uk by holly.cam.harlequin.co.uk; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 12:44:16 +0100 Received: from [192.88.238.248] (dynamic-mac4.cam.harlequin.co.uk) by rocannon.cam.harlequin.co.uk; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 12:44:05 +0100 X-Sender: richard@mailhost.cam.harlequin.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 12:44:08 +0100 To: freebsd-install@freebsd.org From: richard@harlequin.co.uk (Richard Brooksby) Subject: Differing fdisk commands Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk (I'm new to the freebsd-install list, so please forgive me if this point has been raised before.) When installing FreeBSD one gets an interactive fdisk program which, while not ideal, is fairly flexible and useful. Once you've installed FreeBSD you get a rather poor fdisk program which is much less useful (in particular, it doesn't allow you to set the boot flag on a partition). Shouldn't these two programs be unified? Thank you for your time. --- Richard Brooksby Manager & Developer / Memory Management / Symbolic Processing / Harlequin +44 1223 873881 (voice) +44 1223 872519 (fax) From owner-freebsd-install Mon Sep 25 09:05:30 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id JAA15306 for install-outgoing; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 09:05:30 -0700 Received: from haven.uniserve.com (haven.uniserve.com [198.53.215.121]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id JAA15301 for ; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 09:05:28 -0700 Received: by haven.uniserve.com id <30984>; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 09:07:07 +0100 Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 09:07:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Tom Samplonius To: Richard Brooksby cc: freebsd-install@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk On Mon, 25 Sep 1995, Richard Brooksby wrote: > I have FreeBSD 2.0 installed, and am interested in updating to 2.1 when it > is stable and comes out on CD-ROM. Can I use the same convenient This will be difficult as the disk layout (new slice code) changed from 2.0 to 2.1. I believe upgrades will be possible from 2.0.5 -> 2.1 Tom From owner-freebsd-install Mon Sep 25 09:10:09 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id JAA15457 for install-outgoing; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 09:10:09 -0700 Received: from haven.uniserve.com (haven.uniserve.com [198.53.215.121]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id JAA15452 for ; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 09:10:07 -0700 Received: by haven.uniserve.com id <30867>; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 09:11:55 +0100 Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 09:11:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Tom Samplonius To: Richard Brooksby cc: freebsd-install@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Booting FreeBSD from the Windows NT Loader In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk On Mon, 25 Sep 1995, Richard Brooksby wrote: > other ways to boot. (Has anyone else had problems with Windows 95 and > booteasy, by the way?) No, other than win95 will delete booteasy if you install win95 last, but it is fairly easy to re-install. BTW, what's up with CC'ing to _3_ lists? Tom From owner-freebsd-install Mon Sep 25 11:17:32 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id LAA18509 for install-outgoing; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 11:17:32 -0700 Received: from chemserv.umd.edu (chemserv.umd.edu [129.2.64.40]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id LAA18485 ; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 11:17:23 -0700 Received: from mocha.eng.umd.edu (mocha.eng.umd.edu [129.2.98.16]) by chemserv.umd.edu (8.7.Beta.14/8.7.Beta.14) with ESMTP id OAA29958; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 14:16:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: (chuckr@localhost) by mocha.eng.umd.edu (8.7/8.6.4) id OAA11728; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 14:16:54 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 14:16:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Chuck Robey To: Richard Brooksby cc: freebsd-install@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk On Mon, 25 Sep 1995, Richard Brooksby wrote: > This is both a question and a suggestion. > > FreeBSD has a reasonable installation procedure, and the documentation > talks a lot about "intalling" FreeBSD. What about upgrading? > > I have FreeBSD 2.0 installed, and am interested in updating to 2.1 when it > is stable and comes out on CD-ROM. Can I use the same convenient > installation procedure to _upgrade_? Will the install 2.1 procedure > overwrite all my careful configuration in /etc or will it Do The Right > Thing? > > If the install procedure _does_ upgrade correctly, then I suggest the > procedure is documented, along with any pitfalls. If the install procedure > can't upgrade, I suggest that it be changed to do so, or some documentation > is provided on how to do this. > > I'm pretty sure you have thought of this already -- there must be a lot of > people with 2.0 who want to upgrade. I'm impressed by the thoughtfulness > and stability of FreeBSD, which is why I use it. > > Keep up the good work. I wish I had time to pitch in. > One good reason why you haven't found a method of upgrading from 2.0 to another version, is because there isn't one. The filesystem changed right after the release of 2.0, so upgrading to anything more recent requires backup up your files, and doing a fresh reinstall. Believe me, there's no way around it. The new install will reinstall your filesystems, with a newer variety, based upon "slices". > --- > Richard Brooksby > Manager & Developer / Memory Management / Symbolic Processing / Harlequin > +44 1223 873881 (voice) +44 1223 872519 (fax) > > > ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chuckr@eng.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 9120 Edmonston Ct #302 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run Journey2 and n3lxx, both FreeBSD (301) 220-2114 | version 2.2 current -- and great FUN! ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- From owner-freebsd-install Mon Sep 25 11:36:54 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id LAA19091 for install-outgoing; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 11:36:54 -0700 Received: from everest (dtr.rain.com [204.119.8.19]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id LAA19069 ; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 11:36:49 -0700 From: bmk@dtr.com Received: (from bmk@localhost) by everest (8.6.11/8.6.9) id LAA03649; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 11:25:09 -0700 Message-Id: <199509251825.LAA03649@everest> Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade" To: richard@harlequin.co.uk (Richard Brooksby) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 11:25:09 -0700 (PDT) Cc: freebsd-install@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: from "Richard Brooksby" at Sep 25, 95 12:35:50 pm Reply-To: bmk@dtr.com X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3397 Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > FreeBSD has a reasonable installation procedure, and the documentation > talks a lot about "intalling" FreeBSD. What about upgrading? [ I'd appreciate constructive criticism on the following post so I can improve the procedure ] Rumor has it that 2.1 will have a true upgrade procedure built into the install. Jordan would be the person to comment on that. Even with previous versions, I've been able to upgrade successfully without a lot of hassle. Read on... With careful planning of your disk layout and some self-discipline when it comes to customizing your system, upgrading it fairly trivial. To use this procedure, a few restrictions should be observed: (1) /, /usr, and /usr/local should be separate filesystems. Don't install anything into / and /usr, except core FreeBSD stuff. I usually also have a separate filesystem for X11, or install it in /usr/local - mainly so it doesn't get whacked during a reinstall. I also create a separate filesystem for user files and source code. (2) Do all of your customization in either /etc or in the /usr/local filesystem - not in / or /usr. I usually make /usr read-only. (3) Back up all of your filesytems before proceeding. Starting with 2.0.5(?) it's possible for sysinstall to preserve (i.e. not run newfs) selected filesystems. When you assign mountpoints, toggle off newfs for everything but / and /usr. You've already backed up everything you want to save, right? :) Proceed with the installation as usual. Everything in your / and /usr filesystems will be overwritten - and the new version will be installed over the top of it. After the installation is complete, you can meld in your customizations from /etc. You did back it up, didn't you? :) It might help you to see how I've laid out the disks on one of my systems: Filesystem 1024-blocks Used Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/sd0a 24591 14663 7960 65% / /dev/sd0s1e 63535 51736 6716 89% /usr /dev/sd0s1f 13807 5315 7387 42% /var /dev/sd0s2e 302383 63154 215038 23% /home /dev/sd0s2f 127087 52361 64559 45% /usr/X11R6 /dev/sd0s2g 175279 125677 35579 78% /usr/local /dev/sd1s1e 391023 2467 357274 1% /home/www /dev/sd1s2e 510975 330569 139528 70% /home/ftp /dev/sd4s1e 628319 215811 362242 37% /usr/src /dev/cd0a 528386 528386 0 100% /cdrom /dev/sd0s3 205604 121452 84152 59% /dos procfs 4 4 0 100% /proc During a reinstall, only root, /usr, and /var get touched. After reinstalling, I usually restore /etc into a scratch directory and then diff everything to see what's changed in the new version. I then copy over my customizations. I also restore a lot of files in /var - like /var/mail, /var/spool/uucp, and selected stuff in /var/db. Usually doesn't take very long. How successful you will be depends a lot on how careful you are in planning your disk layout. If you dork it up really badly, you have your backups, right? One other thing that I do is maintain a duplicate root filesystem on the second disk. The only thing that's different is the location of root in /etc/fstab. That way, even if something catastrophic happens, I can always boot to single-user and fix whatever's broken. From owner-freebsd-install Mon Sep 25 15:41:06 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id PAA26868 for install-outgoing; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 15:41:06 -0700 Received: from ref.tfs.com (ref.tfs.com [140.145.254.251]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id PAA26830 ; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 15:40:57 -0700 Received: (from julian@localhost) by ref.tfs.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id PAA08265; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 15:40:07 -0700 From: Julian Elischer Message-Id: <199509252240.PAA08265@ref.tfs.com> Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade" To: chuckr@eng.umd.edu (Chuck Robey) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 15:40:07 -0700 (PDT) Cc: richard@harlequin.co.uk, freebsd-install@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: from "Chuck Robey" at Sep 25, 95 02:16:53 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 735 Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > > > > Keep up the good work. I wish I had time to pitch in. > > > > One good reason why you haven't found a method of upgrading from 2.0 to > another version, is because there isn't one. The filesystem changed > right after the release of 2.0, so upgrading to anything more recent > requires backup up your files, and doing a fresh reinstall. Believe me, > there's no way around it. > > The new install will reinstall your filesystems, with a newer variety, > based upon "slices". > this is a bit misleading. the new filsystems layed out in 2.0.5 are more optimal, but if you want to, you can just decline to newfs them and use the old partitions, and install new binaries onto them.. we can still read old partitions From owner-freebsd-install Mon Sep 25 16:26:34 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id QAA29086 for install-outgoing; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 16:26:34 -0700 Received: from chemserv.umd.edu (chemserv.umd.edu [129.2.64.40]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id QAA29062 ; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 16:26:26 -0700 Received: from cappuccino.eng.umd.edu (cappuccino.eng.umd.edu [129.2.98.14]) by chemserv.umd.edu (8.7.Beta.14/8.7.Beta.14) with ESMTP id TAA05276; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 19:26:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: (chuckr@localhost) by cappuccino.eng.umd.edu (8.7/8.6.4) id TAA11376; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 19:25:44 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 19:25:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Chuck Robey To: Julian Elischer cc: richard@harlequin.co.uk, freebsd-install@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade" In-Reply-To: <199509252240.PAA08265@ref.tfs.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk On Mon, 25 Sep 1995, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > > > > Keep up the good work. I wish I had time to pitch in. > > > > > > > One good reason why you haven't found a method of upgrading from 2.0 to > > another version, is because there isn't one. The filesystem changed > > right after the release of 2.0, so upgrading to anything more recent > > requires backup up your files, and doing a fresh reinstall. Believe me, > > there's no way around it. > > > > The new install will reinstall your filesystems, with a newer variety, > > based upon "slices". > > > > this is a bit misleading. the new filsystems layed out in 2.0.5 > are more optimal, but if you want to, you can just decline to newfs > them and use the old partitions, and install new binaries onto them.. > we can still read old partitions > Julian, I think that's a bad thing to tell people. If anyone else agrees, I'll stop saying this, but I think it's a real bad idea, for a whole range of reasons. Besides having to deal with a boatload of howls from folks who lost their files because they were told they could upgrade without the reinstall, how are you going to troubleshoot future reported problems if you aren't even sure of the underlying FS ? I don't like this idea ... ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chuckr@eng.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 9120 Edmonston Ct #302 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run Journey2 and n3lxx, both FreeBSD (301) 220-2114 | version 2.2 current -- and great FUN! ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- From owner-freebsd-install Mon Sep 25 22:34:15 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id WAA12590 for install-outgoing; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 22:34:15 -0700 Received: from ref.tfs.com (ref.tfs.com [140.145.254.251]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id WAA12574 ; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 22:34:12 -0700 Received: (from julian@localhost) by ref.tfs.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id WAA08880; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 22:33:57 -0700 From: Julian Elischer Message-Id: <199509260533.WAA08880@ref.tfs.com> Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade" To: chuckr@eng.umd.edu (Chuck Robey) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 22:33:57 -0700 (PDT) Cc: richard@harlequin.co.uk, freebsd-install@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: from "Chuck Robey" at Sep 25, 95 07:25:42 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2198 Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk well, what has changed? the bootloader. some tuning parameters the diskslice stuff basically looks the same 'on disk' (can handle old slices) I have 'upgraded' across every release since 386bsd 0.1 pl1 and whie I have usually newfs'd every partition at some time or other, I have always had a partition that I left alone here or there. there has never been a problem. > > On Mon, 25 Sep 1995, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > > > > > > > Keep up the good work. I wish I had time to pitch in. > > > > > > > > > > One good reason why you haven't found a method of upgrading from 2.0 to > > > another version, is because there isn't one. The filesystem changed > > > right after the release of 2.0, so upgrading to anything more recent > > > requires backup up your files, and doing a fresh reinstall. Believe me, > > > there's no way around it. > > > > > > The new install will reinstall your filesystems, with a newer variety, > > > based upon "slices". > > > > > > > this is a bit misleading. the new filsystems layed out in 2.0.5 > > are more optimal, but if you want to, you can just decline to newfs > > them and use the old partitions, and install new binaries onto them.. > > we can still read old partitions > > > > Julian, I think that's a bad thing to tell people. If anyone else > agrees, I'll stop saying this, but I think it's a real bad idea, for a > whole range of reasons. > > Besides having to deal with a boatload of howls from folks who lost their > files because they were told they could upgrade without the reinstall, > how are you going to troubleshoot future reported problems if you aren't > even sure of the underlying FS ? I don't like this idea ... > > ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- > Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data > chuckr@eng.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. > 9120 Edmonston Ct #302 | > Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run Journey2 and n3lxx, both FreeBSD > (301) 220-2114 | version 2.2 current -- and great FUN! > ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- > > From owner-freebsd-install Mon Sep 25 22:55:06 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id WAA13092 for install-outgoing; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 22:55:06 -0700 Received: from Root.COM (implode.Root.COM [198.145.90.17]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id WAA13087 ; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 22:55:02 -0700 Received: from corbin.Root.COM (corbin [198.145.90.34]) by Root.COM (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id WAA00530; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 22:53:43 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by corbin.Root.COM (8.6.12/8.6.5) with SMTP id WAA12911; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 22:56:12 -0700 Message-Id: <199509260556.WAA12911@corbin.Root.COM> To: Julian Elischer cc: chuckr@eng.umd.edu (Chuck Robey), richard@harlequin.co.uk, freebsd-install@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade" In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 25 Sep 95 22:33:57 PDT." <199509260533.WAA08880@ref.tfs.com> From: David Greenman Reply-To: davidg@Root.COM Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 22:56:06 -0700 Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk >well, what has changed? >the bootloader. > >some tuning parameters > >the diskslice stuff basically looks the same 'on disk' >(can handle old slices) > >I have 'upgraded' across every release since 386bsd 0.1 pl1 >and whie I have usually newfs'd every partition at some time or other, >I have always had a partition that I left alone here or there. >there has never been a problem. ...The handling of symbolic links (how they are stored in the filesystem - in the inode), and a few other things I've forgotten. There is allegedly a bug in our 4.2BSD filesystem compatibility related to symbolic links (or was it somewhere else?) that Terry recently fixed. The fix has not been brought into 2.1 as it involves a bee's nest of other changes. I highly recommend that people update their filesystems to the 4.4BSD format. I don't have any old 4.2BSD filesystems here and I will not guarantee that those will work reliably for general use (e.g. new file creates, etc). -DG From owner-freebsd-install Tue Sep 26 03:42:36 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id DAA00730 for install-outgoing; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 03:42:36 -0700 Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [192.216.222.226]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id DAA00715 ; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 03:42:20 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id DAA22044; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 03:41:09 -0700 To: Chuck Robey cc: Julian Elischer , richard@harlequin.co.uk, freebsd-install@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade" In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 25 Sep 1995 19:25:42 EDT." Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 03:41:09 -0700 Message-ID: <22041.812112069@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > Besides having to deal with a boatload of howls from folks who lost their > files because they were told they could upgrade without the reinstall, > how are you going to troubleshoot future reported problems if you aren't > even sure of the underlying FS ? I don't like this idea ... The underlying fs hasn't changed - just the disklabels. Jordan From owner-freebsd-install Tue Sep 26 10:51:22 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id KAA14758 for install-outgoing; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 10:51:22 -0700 Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id KAA14676 ; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 10:51:05 -0700 Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id KAA07895; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 10:45:35 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199509261745.KAA07895@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade" To: jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 10:45:35 -0700 (MST) Cc: chuckr@eng.umd.edu, julian@ref.tfs.com, richard@harlequin.co.uk, freebsd-install@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <22041.812112069@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Sep 26, 95 03:41:09 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1936 Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > > Besides having to deal with a boatload of howls from folks who lost their > > files because they were told they could upgrade without the reinstall, > > how are you going to troubleshoot future reported problems if you aren't > > even sure of the underlying FS ? I don't like this idea ... > > The underlying fs hasn't changed - just the disklabels. There is backward compatability, which is there at what I would call "great expense" because of the endianness choices being made in favor of Motorolla byte order. Specifically, there is now a type hint field in the directory and the size of the length has been reduced from a short to a char, the other char being stolen for the hint field. In the superblock, there are several additional fields that the fsck does not recognize as being there for backward compatability. They store, among other things, the maxsymlinklength. The existance of these fields makes old FS's appear "dirty" on each reboot. Symlinks are allowed to be stored as directory entries rather than having inodes at all. There are semantic differences for links in directories with the sticky bit/SUID/SGID bits set that result from this. Specifically, you can create links for which you do not have priveledges to delete. There are bits which attribute the file: schg file can not be changed uchg file can not be changed; can be unset by root or owner arch file has been archived (root only) dump file should not be archived sappend file can only be appended to uappend file can only be appened to; can be unset by root or owner sappend/schg can only be unset in single user mode. In addition to these changes, the FS in 386BSD did not support the clean flag, and the current and immediately previous FS does. So the FS /has/ changed somewhat. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. From owner-freebsd-install Tue Sep 26 12:31:27 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id MAA19315 for install-outgoing; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 12:31:27 -0700 Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [192.216.222.226]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id MAA19309 for ; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 12:31:24 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA23378; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 12:30:59 -0700 To: richard@harlequin.co.uk (Richard Brooksby) cc: freebsd-install@freebsd.org Subject: Re: One-line status windows In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 25 Sep 1995 12:35:44 BST." Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 12:30:59 -0700 Message-ID: <23376.812143859@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > When the installation program is reporting progress, such as newfs > commands, it prints each one in its own dialog box, erasing the previous > one, often too fast for the eye to follow. Yeah, this is due to inherent limitations in what's currently offered by the `libdialog' library (/usr/src/gnu/lib/libdialog). You can't put the popup dialogs at arbitrary x/y locations, etc. The problems have been known about for a long time, but no one seems to have the time to do anything about it. :-( A more generalized GUI paradigm has also been talked about here from time to time, but again - not a lot of code written. Everyone interested in fancy install enabling tools like this also seems to be interested in many other things as well, and there are only so many hours in the day! :) I would welcome an attempt to breath life into the installation mechanism framework from the "display library" perspective. We could also use more enabling technology that doesn't require X. Jordan From owner-freebsd-install Tue Sep 26 12:34:49 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id MAA19457 for install-outgoing; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 12:34:49 -0700 Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [192.216.222.226]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id MAA19449 for ; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 12:34:47 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA23392; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 12:33:59 -0700 To: richard@harlequin.co.uk (Richard Brooksby) cc: freebsd-install@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Differing fdisk commands In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 25 Sep 1995 12:44:08 BST." Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 12:33:59 -0700 Message-ID: <23390.812144039@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > When installing FreeBSD one gets an interactive fdisk program which, while > not ideal, is fairly flexible and useful. Once you've installed FreeBSD > you get a rather poor fdisk program which is much less useful (in > particular, it doesn't allow you to set the boot flag on a partition). > Shouldn't these two programs be unified? Yes! Sources now available! Interested? :-) Jordan From owner-freebsd-install Tue Sep 26 13:36:54 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id NAA21054 for install-outgoing; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 13:36:54 -0700 Received: from bacchus.eng.umd.edu (bacchus.eng.umd.edu [129.2.94.5]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id NAA21027 ; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 13:36:09 -0700 Received: from mocha.eng.umd.edu (mocha.eng.umd.edu [129.2.98.16]) by bacchus.eng.umd.edu (8.7/8.7) with ESMTP id QAA25428; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 16:35:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: (chuckr@localhost) by mocha.eng.umd.edu (8.7/8.6.4) id QAA14591; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 16:35:01 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 16:35:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Chuck Robey To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" cc: Julian Elischer , richard@harlequin.co.uk, freebsd-install@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade" In-Reply-To: <22041.812112069@time.cdrom.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk On Tue, 26 Sep 1995, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > Besides having to deal with a boatload of howls from folks who lost their > > files because they were told they could upgrade without the reinstall, > > how are you going to troubleshoot future reported problems if you aren't > > even sure of the underlying FS ? I don't like this idea ... > > The underlying fs hasn't changed - just the disklabels. See David's reply ... The idea is, if you have to ask, then you are really likely to fall into the category of someone who shouldn't do it anyways. What with more and more people hacking into stuff to support multiple disks, having to deal with two different dislabels, and not being sure which one is there, seems to be asking for trouble. I'll let you decide, if you say to folks there's a way to upgrade without reinstalling. I think the level of support needed is gonna rise way up. Especially when 2.1 comes out, and folks want to upgrade. Maybe my way isn't totally true, but it might save FreeBSD getting a bad rep when folks who are underqualified to try this screw things up, and blame us for it. You'll have to agree, I think, the reinstall route is WAY safer, altho hard on folks. > > Jordan > ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chuckr@eng.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 9120 Edmonston Ct #302 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run Journey2 and n3lxx, both FreeBSD (301) 220-2114 | version 2.2 current -- and great FUN! ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- From owner-freebsd-install Tue Sep 26 15:41:11 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id PAA29452 for install-outgoing; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 15:41:11 -0700 Received: from ibp.ibp.fr (ibp.ibp.fr [132.227.60.30]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id PAA29442 ; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 15:41:07 -0700 Received: from blaise.ibp.fr (blaise.ibp.fr [132.227.60.1]) by ibp.ibp.fr (8.6.12/jtpda-5.0) with ESMTP id XAA29371 ; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 23:41:03 +0100 Received: from (uucp@localhost) by blaise.ibp.fr (8.6.12/jtpda-5.0) with UUCP id XAA02831 ; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 23:41:02 +0100 Received: (from roberto@localhost) by keltia.Freenix.FR (8.7/keltia-uucp-2.5.1) id WAA25519; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 22:55:04 +0100 (MET) From: Ollivier Robert Message-Id: <199509262155.WAA25519@keltia.Freenix.FR> Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade" To: terry@lambert.org (Terry Lambert) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 22:55:04 +0100 (MET) Cc: freebsd-install@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199509261745.KAA07895@phaeton.artisoft.com> from "Terry Lambert" at Sep 26, 95 10:45:35 am X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 2.2-CURRENT ctm#1141 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME8] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk It seems that Terry Lambert said: > having inodes at all. There are semantic differences for links in > directories with the sticky bit/SUID/SGID bits set that result from > this. Specifically, you can create links for which you do not have > priveledges to delete. I really think we should go back to the previous behaviour... I don't see what CSRG gained by this. Can someone enlighten me ? -- Ollivier ROBERT -=- The daemon is FREE! -=- roberto@keltia.frmug.fr.net FreeBSD keltia.freenix.fr 2.2-CURRENT #2: Mon Sep 25 02:02:31 MET 1995 From owner-freebsd-install Tue Sep 26 16:02:13 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id QAA02833 for install-outgoing; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 16:02:13 -0700 Received: from ref.tfs.com (ref.tfs.com [140.145.254.251]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id QAA02808 ; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 16:02:08 -0700 Received: (from julian@localhost) by ref.tfs.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id PAA10812; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 15:58:47 -0700 From: Julian Elischer Message-Id: <199509262258.PAA10812@ref.tfs.com> Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade" To: terry@lambert.org (Terry Lambert) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 15:58:47 -0700 (PDT) Cc: jkh@time.cdrom.com, chuckr@eng.umd.edu, richard@harlequin.co.uk, freebsd-install@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199509261745.KAA07895@phaeton.artisoft.com> from "Terry Lambert" at Sep 26, 95 10:45:35 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 234 Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk but an old fs is stil a valid fs under the new scheme! > > In addition to these changes, the FS in 386BSD did not support the clean > flag, and the current and immediately previous FS does. > > So the FS /has/ changed somewhat. > From owner-freebsd-install Tue Sep 26 16:42:55 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id QAA08005 for install-outgoing; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 16:42:55 -0700 Received: from chemserv.umd.edu (chemserv.umd.edu [129.2.64.40]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id QAA07977 ; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 16:42:48 -0700 Received: from espresso.eng.umd.edu (espresso.eng.umd.edu [129.2.98.13]) by chemserv.umd.edu (8.7.Beta.14/8.7.Beta.14) with ESMTP id TAA21375; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 19:42:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: (chuckr@localhost) by espresso.eng.umd.edu (8.7/8.6.4) id TAA12458; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 19:42:00 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 19:41:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Chuck Robey To: Julian Elischer cc: Terry Lambert , jkh@time.cdrom.com, richard@harlequin.co.uk, freebsd-install@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade" In-Reply-To: <199509262258.PAA10812@ref.tfs.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk On Tue, 26 Sep 1995, Julian Elischer wrote: > but an old fs is stil a valid fs under the new scheme! I'm not arguing that for a second, Julian, but is this good advice to give to someone asking questions on -questions? That's the only thing I'm addressing. > > > > In addition to these changes, the FS in 386BSD did not support the clean > > flag, and the current and immediately previous FS does. > > > > So the FS /has/ changed somewhat. > > > > ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chuckr@eng.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 9120 Edmonston Ct #302 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run Journey2 and n3lxx, both FreeBSD (301) 220-2114 | version 2.2 current -- and great FUN! ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- From owner-freebsd-install Tue Sep 26 17:04:23 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id RAA11000 for install-outgoing; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 17:04:23 -0700 Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id RAA10968 ; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 17:04:18 -0700 Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id QAA08714; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 16:58:47 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199509262358.QAA08714@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade" To: roberto@keltia.freenix.fr (Ollivier Robert) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 16:58:47 -0700 (MST) Cc: terry@lambert.org, freebsd-install@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199509262155.WAA25519@keltia.Freenix.FR> from "Ollivier Robert" at Sep 26, 95 10:55:04 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 651 Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > It seems that Terry Lambert said: > > having inodes at all. There are semantic differences for links in > > directories with the sticky bit/SUID/SGID bits set that result from > > this. Specifically, you can create links for which you do not have > > priveledges to delete. > > I really think we should go back to the previous behaviour... I don't see > what CSRG gained by this. Can someone enlighten me ? Symlinks with zero cost in inodes. A good argument for symlinks in to the init.d scripts. 8-). Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. From owner-freebsd-install Tue Sep 26 18:46:49 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id SAA24480 for install-outgoing; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 18:46:49 -0700 Received: from kryten.atinc.com (kryten.Atinc.COM [198.138.38.7]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id SAA24475 for ; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 18:46:46 -0700 Received: (jmb@localhost) by kryten.atinc.com (8.6.9/8.3) id VAA06046; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 21:33:23 -0400 Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 21:33:22 -0400 (EDT) From: "Jonathan M. Bresler" Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade" To: Tom Samplonius cc: Richard Brooksby , freebsd-install@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk On Mon, 25 Sep 1995, Tom Samplonius wrote: > > On Mon, 25 Sep 1995, Richard Brooksby wrote: > > > I have FreeBSD 2.0 installed, and am interested in updating to 2.1 when it > > is stable and comes out on CD-ROM. Can I use the same convenient > > This will be difficult as the disk layout (new slice code) changed from > 2.0 to 2.1. > > I believe upgrades will be possible from 2.0.5 -> 2.1 yes. i did that. gary clark ii provided this method: (damn, cant find it--here goes from memory) sup the sources make world install world create a new kernel install kernel reboot to new kernel make world again install world again Jonathan M. Bresler jmb@kryten.atinc.com | Analysis & Technology, Inc. FreeBSD Postmaster jmb@FreeBSD.Org | 2341 Jeff Davis Hwy play go. | Arlington, VA 22202 ride bike. hack FreeBSD.--ah the good life | 703-418-2800 x346 From owner-freebsd-install Wed Sep 27 10:30:36 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id KAA07572 for install-outgoing; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 10:30:36 -0700 Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id KAA07552 ; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 10:30:21 -0700 Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id KAA10418; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 10:23:36 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199509271723.KAA10418@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade" To: julian@ref.tfs.com (Julian Elischer) Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 10:23:35 -0700 (MST) Cc: terry@lambert.org, jkh@time.cdrom.com, chuckr@eng.umd.edu, richard@harlequin.co.uk, freebsd-install@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199509262258.PAA10812@ref.tfs.com> from "Julian Elischer" at Sep 26, 95 03:58:47 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 353 Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > but an old fs is stil a valid fs under the new scheme! Just never a clean one? 8-). Remeber also that if one were upgrading from all the way back, the reserved space for the bootblock has gotten larger. 8-(. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. From owner-freebsd-install Wed Sep 27 17:59:33 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id RAA21119 for install-outgoing; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 17:59:33 -0700 Received: from ref.tfs.com (ref.tfs.com [140.145.254.251]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id RAA21098 ; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 17:59:29 -0700 Received: (from julian@localhost) by ref.tfs.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id RAA13413; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 17:58:13 -0700 From: Julian Elischer Message-Id: <199509280058.RAA13413@ref.tfs.com> Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade" To: terry@lambert.org (Terry Lambert) Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 17:58:12 -0700 (PDT) Cc: terry@lambert.org, jkh@time.cdrom.com, chuckr@eng.umd.edu, richard@harlequin.co.uk, freebsd-install@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199509271723.KAA10418@phaeton.artisoft.com> from "Terry Lambert" at Sep 27, 95 10:23:35 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 408 Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > > > but an old fs is stil a valid fs under the new scheme! > > Just never a clean one? 8-). > > Remeber also that if one were upgrading from all the way back, the reserved > space for the bootblock has gotten larger. 8-(. I don't think so.... > > > Terry Lambert > terry@lambert.org > --- > Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present > or previous employers. > From owner-freebsd-install Wed Sep 27 18:07:33 1995 Return-Path: owner-install Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id SAA21560 for install-outgoing; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 18:07:33 -0700 Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id SAA21541 ; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 18:07:29 -0700 Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id SAA11549; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 18:01:26 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199509280101.SAA11549@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade" To: julian@ref.tfs.com (Julian Elischer) Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 18:01:25 -0700 (MST) Cc: terry@lambert.org, jkh@time.cdrom.com, chuckr@eng.umd.edu, richard@harlequin.co.uk, freebsd-install@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199509280058.RAA13413@ref.tfs.com> from "Julian Elischer" at Sep 27, 95 05:58:12 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 450 Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > > Remeber also that if one were upgrading from all the way back, the reserved > > space for the bootblock has gotten larger. 8-(. > > I don't think so.... My mistake; I thought this had changed. Maybe it's the disklabel itself that changed? I remember an incompatability when upgrading a 386BSD 0.1PK2... Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.