Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 13:02:22 +0300 From: Daniel Kalchev <daniel@digsys.bg> To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS: unsupported ZFS version 5000 (should be 28) Message-ID: <51FB83AE.4020202@digsys.bg> In-Reply-To: <CAPyBAS5ekywBiTdoANt4pCLMknURKFp3mLK2e5tXNpW5FQejSQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAPyBAS6Sf-5-HF%2BVGGZN1bp2Q2YebF5=Aw_Qj0OTED8oppk6SA@mail.gmail.com> <CAOFF%2BZ2ff8%2BwPQBR6YM2n9vX8qsZoq_VWXVHFKXB5qWp11Hddg@mail.gmail.com> <CAPyBAS4ELa_w7Zm3JKcrqH9EvohRP6%2BMOuqDc3p9i=i1gdPpjg@mail.gmail.com> <CAPyBAS5ekywBiTdoANt4pCLMknURKFp3mLK2e5tXNpW5FQejSQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?51FB83AE.4020202>