From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 29 16:33:12 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 7D74A16A4CE for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2004 16:33:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from zardoz.rd.imagescape.com (zardoz.rd.imagescape.com [66.100.151.130]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4132943D46 for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2004 16:33:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from puna@imagescape.com) Received: from [192.168.0.59] (nikko.rd.imagescape.com [192.168.0.59]) (authenticated bits=0)i6TGWj4Y032367 for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2004 11:32:46 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from puna@imagescape.com) Message-ID: <41092740.4080406@imagescape.com> Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 11:35:12 -0500 From: Puna Tannehill Organization: Imaginary Landscape, LLC User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Windows/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <20047299555.097692@IBM-R40> <41090BAF.6010600@imagescape.com> <20040729144550.GC28698@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20040729144550.GC28698@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Updating 5.2.1 Release # X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 16:33:12 -0000 Matthew Seaman wrote: > On Thu, Jul 29, 2004 at 09:37:35AM -0500, Puna Tannehill wrote: > >>Scott wrote: > > >>>uname -a shows: >>>FreeBSD 5.2.1-Release #0: >>> >>>I was expecting the release (version, revision# ?) number to >>>be greater than #0. I think I've seen where the latest >>>revision is #9 or so? Do I need to tell it to get the latest >>>revision somehow? Do I need to change the cvs tag= to >>>something else to get up to date? >> >>I thought the #number indicated the number of times the server has been >>rebooted based upon the last time the kernel was recompiled. Being that it >>is #0, it was your first book. Reboot the machine and check the number >> again. > > > I believe that the #n is the number of times the kernel has been > re-compiled since the last time the system was installed. It's > probably not a very interesting datum except to kernel hackers who > need to do a lot of recompiling. Oh right right. Thank you for the correction. I'm still wiping the sleep from my eyes. Actually, it might be an "fun" indicator of how many 15-20 minute chunks of time one can never get back. heehee hmm ~sighs and sips coffee~ Puna > What the original poster was thinking of is the patchlevel that gets > incremented every time a new security (or nowadays: errata) patch is > applied to any of the -RELEASE branches. That modifies the OS name > (ie. the output of 'uname -r'), so instead of: > > 5.2.1-RELEASE > > it says (at the latest count): > > 5.2.1-RELEASE-p9 > > See /usr/src/sys/conf/newvers.sh for the file that controls all that. > > Cheers, > > Matthew >