From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 2 10:02:32 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A14876A for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 10:02:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from daniel@digsys.bg) Received: from smtp-sofia.digsys.bg (smtp-sofia.digsys.bg [193.68.21.123]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 005AA2EBC for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 10:02:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dcave.digsys.bg (dcave.digsys.bg [193.68.6.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp-sofia.digsys.bg (8.14.6/8.14.6) with ESMTP id r72A2M3R057777 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 13:02:22 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from daniel@digsys.bg) Message-ID: <51FB83AE.4020202@digsys.bg> Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 13:02:22 +0300 From: Daniel Kalchev User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130731 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS: unsupported ZFS version 5000 (should be 28) References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 10:02:32 -0000 On 02.08.13 10:48, Tim Gustafson wrote: > So now I've got base/releng/9.1 revision number 253878 installed on > that machine, which apparently does support the 5000 zpool version, > but seems to somehow not have a compatible boot loader. As it was already indicated, there is no support for zpool version 5000 (feature flags) in base/releng/9.1. There is however in base/stable/9 and in base/stable/8 what you obviously has before. I believe here the unfortunate naming of 9-stable as RELENG_9 in CVS has confused you. SVN layout is different now, more logical. In general, it is good idea if you migrate from 8-stable, to migrate to 9-stable etc, because chances are 8-stable contains "newer" code than 9-release -- except if the 9-release just happened. Apparently, at some point you, or someone who has root on that server did zpool upgrade. ZFS does not auto upgrade. Daniel