From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Oct 30 00:55:14 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@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 6C789909 for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2014 00:55:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gromit.dlib.vt.edu (gromit.dlib.vt.edu [128.173.126.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "gromit.dlib.vt.edu", Issuer "Chumby Certificate Authority" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FEC02DF for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2014 00:55:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gromit.chumby.lan (c-71-63-94-21.hsd1.va.comcast.net [71.63.94.21]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gromit.dlib.vt.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CFBB15AC; Wed, 29 Oct 2014 20:47:43 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) Subject: Re: Small motd nit in 10.1 From: Paul Mather In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 20:47:42 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <93E9657A-737E-4705-A0E5-01F9E9110261@gromit.dlib.vt.edu> References: <8C81A636-D2B5-4EFB-9EA3-58E88E16CA94@spam.lifeforms.nl> To: Warren Block X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org, Walter Hop X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 00:55:14 -0000 On Oct 29, 2014, at 8:14 PM, Warren Block wrote: > On Wed, 29 Oct 2014, Walter Hop wrote: >=20 >> I noticed that the motd has been updated, which is great. >> = https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/releng/10.1/etc/motd?revision=3D272461&vie= w=3Dmarkup >>=20 >> However, the following line could be improved: >> Show the version of FreeBSD installed: uname -a >>=20 >> I would recommend changing the line to: >> Show the version of FreeBSD installed: freebsd-version >>=20 >> Users often confuse the kernel version (uname -a) with the actual = FreeBSD version from the freebsd-version(1) command. Because of this, = people needlessly worry whether their system was updated correctly after = freebsd-update has run, because they erroneously check this with ?uname = -a?. A small motd change will hopefully prevent that. >=20 > Sorry, I don't understand the source of confusion. The potential confusion arises because freebsd-version agrees with freebsd-update, but uname doesn't always. If you track FreeBSD via freebsd-update, uname only gets bumped when the kernel is updated. If you want to know which version of FreeBSD you're running, which command is more accurate: freebsd-version or uname -a? I would argue the former (freebsd-version). If you track FreeBSD via source updates, freebsd-version and uname -a match each other, so long as you update kernel and world together. Consider the system below, updated using freebsd-update after the last advisory causing an update to 10.0-RELEASE: =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D % freebsd-version=20 10.0-RELEASE-p11 % uname -a FreeBSD chumby.dlib.vt.edu 10.0-RELEASE-p10 FreeBSD 10.0-RELEASE-p10 #0: = Mon Oct 20 12:38:37 UTC 2014 = root@amd64-builder.daemonology.net:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC i386 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D When you run freebsd-update on that system it considers itself currently as being a 10.0-RELEASE-p11 system when checking for updates. Cheers, Paul.=