From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 23 22:09:15 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@nevdull.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A76F184D for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2015 22:09:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from wonkity.com (wonkity.com [67.158.26.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "wonkity.com", Issuer "wonkity.com" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 395A4D52 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2015 22:09:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from wonkity.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wonkity.com (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t5NM9Cbw064155 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 23 Jun 2015 16:09:12 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from localhost (wblock@localhost) by wonkity.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/Submit) with ESMTP id t5NM9Cu1064152; Tue, 23 Jun 2015 16:09:12 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 16:09:12 -0600 (MDT) From: Warren Block To: Cary cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: getting ports updated on an older FreeBSD (5.1) In-Reply-To: <86oak6p8w9.fsf@bsdstb.Belkin> Message-ID: References: <86oak6p8w9.fsf@bsdstb.Belkin> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (BSF 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (wonkity.com [127.0.0.1]); Tue, 23 Jun 2015 16:09:12 -0600 (MDT) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 22:09:15 -0000 On Tue, 23 Jun 2015, Cary wrote: > Warren Block writes: > >> On Tue, 23 Jun 2015, Matthew Seaman wrote: >> >>> On 06/23/15 08:59, Christoph Kukulies wrote: >>>> Although you may be right with regard to obsoleteness of 5.0.0 and my >>>> 5.1 version in general, >>>> I'm wondering whether it would be possible to >>>> run a 10.1 executable under 5.1 (possible link it statically?). >>> >>> 5.1 Release happened during a particularly difficult period for FreeBSD >>> development. As I recall, it was quite quickly superseded by 5.2 release >>> >>> Your quickest and most reliable way forward is to upgrade your FreeBSD >>> box to something supported. Given you're starting from such an old > > >> Agreed, except I would suggest a completely separate computer for the >> new install. Old stuff that has been running for years can be fragile. >> Moving a cable that has been motionless for years can make it fail, and >> it's somehow a given that these systems are never backed up. >> > > Were that the case, could there be any risk running a 10.1 executable > on such a system? I would be surprised if a 10.1 executable would run on a 5.1 system. But that misses the point. Do not try to run modern binaries on an ancient system. Set up a new 10.1 system, install new versions of the same software, and copy configuration and data files from the old one. Trying to update a 5.1 system in-place or run newer binaries on it is unlikely to work. If it does work, it's probably going to be shaky. If it doesn't work, trying to get it to work will almost certainly take more time than setting up a new 10.1 system and configuring it with modern versions of the same applications, then copying data and configuration. Look at it this way: trying to do anything with a FreeBSD 5.1 system is pretty much file recovery. Many, many things have changed since then.