From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Tue Feb 9 09:53:30 2021 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A0B1538941 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 09:53:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from matthew@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::24b:4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "R3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DZdWG06mbz4mlS; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 09:53:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from matthew@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk [IPv6:2001:8b0:151:1:c4ea:bd49:619b:6cb3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk", Issuer "R3" (verified OK)) (Authenticated sender: matthew/mail) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D24BF2EEF2; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 09:53:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from matthew@FreeBSD.org) Received: from PD0786.local (unknown [IPv6:2001:8b0:151:1:5960:44ae:4a0d:b97a]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) by smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 76B8C52B0; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 09:53:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=FreeBSD.org Authentication-Results: smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk/76B8C52B0; dkim=none; dkim-atps=neutral Subject: Re: "make" in ports tells me "requires kernel source files in SRC_BASE=/usr/src." despite an up-to-date /usr/src To: Michael Schuster , "Oleg V. Nauman" Cc: freeBSD Mailing List References: <601d6f51-e3e5-a780-332a-95648fe87168@yuripv.dev> <2281312.bDOn7JOVgO@sigill.theweb.org.ua> From: Matthew Seaman Message-ID: Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2021 09:53:27 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2021 09:53:30 -0000 On 08/02/2021 20:10, Michael Schuster wrote: > $ bectl list > BE Active Mountpoint Space Created > [...] > BE_20210206_175312_CURRENT14 NR / 30.8G 2021-02-06 17:53 > BE_20210208_204901_CURRENT_14 - /mnt 860K 2021-02-08 20:49 > > ... which, as I found out, does NOT include /usr/src; only after creating a > snapshot of same and mounting that specifically: There's an important difference between beadm and bectl which seems relevant here. beadm defaults to accepting a tree of ZFSes as a boot environment, whereas bectl only applies to the ZFS at the top level of the boot environment unless you use the -r flag. I don't know why the difference was introduced, since bectl was specifically written as a drop-in replacement for beadm, and the recursive behaviour of beadm is generally what you'ld want if you have several ZFSes per boot environment and entirely harmless if you only have a single ZFS per BE. Cheers, Matthew