From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 29 02:52:31 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A21BE16A4CE for ; Mon, 29 Nov 2004 02:52:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.200]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3199943D62 for ; Mon, 29 Nov 2004 02:52:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from robbak@gmail.com) Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 69so652028wri for ; Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:52:30 -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=U7U7lZeg5ItRuIeecwkY9sgP1kK/fMeu0muAl2untkhMnvIlFJEENKM15Rx+JSwGAxVQkKgLVok0C/GVSNFPYM0mVQX0Gc2h1I0DIBqsIX5jkYPXZYOjSJOD9BytgikcOk78lLW26hbLOx298ZaYRFv5R/hFAy6ufj6QDh23N60= Received: by 10.54.3.16 with SMTP id 16mr189352wrc; Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:52:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.54.14.79 with HTTP; Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:52:30 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 12:52:30 +1000 From: Robert Backhaus To: Stephen Montgomery-Smith In-Reply-To: <41AA745E.3070400@math.missouri.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <02a201c4d2b7$451a82f0$cbc1a10a@Curs3> <20041128.174946.105188774.imp@bsdimp.com> <41AA745E.3070400@math.missouri.edu> cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 5.2 -> 5.3 without single mode? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Robert Backhaus List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 02:52:31 -0000 In general, yes, there will be. Quite an extensive one. Usually thoroughly bikeshedded on the lists beforehand. As a rule, always do installkernel before installworld. The new kernel will always run the old world (within reason), although often not vice versa. Then, in case of a failure, it should always come back up. On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:59:10 -0600, Stephen Montgomery-Smith > > So if there is a new common system call introduced, will it arrive with > a nice entry in UPDATING plus a HEADS UP? > > Stephen