From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 9 13:40:23 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6B2A16A4CE for ; Tue, 9 Nov 2004 13:40:23 +0000 (GMT) Received: from rproxy.gmail.com (rproxy.gmail.com [64.233.170.198]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F139543D46 for ; Tue, 9 Nov 2004 13:40:21 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from subhro.kar@gmail.com) Received: by rproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 1so247332rny for ; Tue, 09 Nov 2004 05:40:19 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=Gi5SFO172c2uErWmB78uD/m7wgDObq4CpzzP7ReDfYw0jfP+R8iKkRAcAFxxUcdbDsic8/R5X/5dPSeOUPsnITyO1vMBITrnzSqO4w4jPDGaEm7tpljlrqGeFak27ViPzVC2zIk+IMlUiX/ml6a7MP0Kt7yqoPbR/FebY7obU6A= Received: by 10.38.10.71 with SMTP id 71mr214639rnj; Tue, 09 Nov 2004 05:40:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.38.206.10 with HTTP; Tue, 9 Nov 2004 05:40:19 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 19:10:19 +0530 From: Subhro To: Volker Lieder In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Experiences with systemupdate Freebsd 4.9 -> 5.3 X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Subhro List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 13:40:23 -0000 On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 13:12:32 +0100, Volker Lieder wrote: > Hello list, > has anybody tried to update a freebsd 4.9 incl. apache, mysql and other > ports to 5.3 or 5.2? It CAN be done although not recommended. Read the WHOLE of /usr/src/UPDATING before trying out your experiment. And make sure you have 0 day backups before starting. I have done it on my PC just for fun but there would be performance issues as 5.* works with UFS2 whereas 4.* works on UFS. MY personal opinion is there would be performance degrades after the update. Regards S. -- Subhro Sankha Kar School of Information Technology Block AQ-13/1 Sector V ZIP 700091 India