Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 13:53:00 +0200 From: Thor Legvold <tlegvold@c2i.net> To: Kent Stewart <kstewart@3-cities.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Upgrade questions Message-ID: <00042414201300.00309@valhall.c2i.net> References: <39036257.C004BD9B@3-cities.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 23 Apr 2000, you wrote: > Thor Legvold wrote: > > <snip> > > All seems stable, I've restored the files I managed to save and have only done > > some simple configuration of the existing install to make things more livable. > > So far the system seems very responsive and useable, although certain elements > > of the KDE system just don't work for me. > > > > I'd now like to consider upgrading and have several questions about it. My > > upgrading relates to four areas: > > > > 1. 3.3-RELEASE (actually I think I already upp'ed it to -STABLE) to 4.0-RELEASE > > (or possibly -STABLE if it exists). I understand that all I need to do is > > download the boot floppies, reboot and use /stand/sysinstall to choose > > "upgrade" and everything goes automatically via ftp. I've done it once before > > and it seemed to work well, except for the partition glitch mentioned above. I > > didn't change (knowingly) partition information (it was after all an upgrade, > > not a new install) so I imagine the problem was there from before. Are there > > other things I should know about 4.0 before I upgrade? 4.0 is an improvement > > over 3.3, right...? Or should I instead go with 3.4? There are so many versions > > available it's difficult to know what is the mainstream basically stable > > version eveyone uses - there is 3.3, 3.4, 4.0, 2.8, etc, all with "stable" (or > > at least "release") status. From my experience with other Unix systems, usually > > the latest (non-developmental) version is the most stable (bug fixes, > > optimizing of code, etc), i.e. the latest "release". Does that apply also to > > FreeBSD? > > I'm curious what parts of KDE don't work. I pretty much did a full > install of KDE and haven't found any but I'm not using them all. kppp doesn't work. kvirc dumped core, now (after a fresh install) it seems to work ok. kpilot doesn't work, but it's probably a configuration issue on my end. krn doesn't work (some lib not being found), I've installed knews instead. > The source upgrade via cvsup to RELENG_4 can be troublesome. Once you > have finished cvsup'ing, you have an /usr/src/UPDATING document that > you must follow to the letter. I tried and it died in the middle of > the "make installkernel KERNEL=RUBY" with an error=64. At that point, > I had a mix of code and the easiest way out was a clean install. I've Unerstood. I haven't (yet) built a new kernel. I've done it under Linux, and don't imagine any problem under FreeBSD, but the default kernel works fine for now so it's not highest on my list. I'd like first and foremost to get the system updated and install stuff I need for day to day "productivity" (AbiWord, NetScape or similar, spreadsheet, ICQ, email, etc), then I can start exploring the system in more depth as I get time. > never had an upgrade from source fail but this one did. My system > needed restructuring because I still had my novice install with a / > partition that included /usr, /tmp, and /var. The rebuild left / as a > 100MB partition and the other three had their own partitions. The > sizes were what I considered as appropriate for my needs. I upgraded my previous install, first to 3.4, then to 4.0-RELEASE via ftp and /stand/sysinstall. It seemed to work perfecctly. Of course there was the overlapping partition problem that ended up hosing both my Windows and BSD partitions.... I've installed initially with separate /, /usr, /usr/local, /var, /home and /tmp partitions. With 4.5GB of disk I have given the partitions room to grow without wasting too much space. /usr, /usr/local and /home have over 1GB each. I've used BSD 3.3 Unix (NextStep) for many years and have tried Linux several times, but never really got to like it (Linux). So I figured FreeBSD was a perfect choice, since I already know a bit about BSD. Unfortunatley I wasn't able to unstall it untill recently because of driver issues, my SCSI card only appeared as supported a half year ago or so (DPT). Back to my question - I'm not interested in a new install, because I don't have the 4.0 media and don't wan't to wait 6-8 weeks for it (what it takes to order on line and wait for the post and customs, by which time it costs me twice what Walnut Creek takes). I have an ISDN link which puts an upgrade at around 2-4 hours depending on what packages I choose. So what I would like to know is if I'm better off doing a source upgrade (via CVS or other means) or a /stand/sysinstall "package" upgrade. > The end result was a number of improvements. I was happy that I > upgraded but I spent of couple of unhappy days until I got back to an > operating setup. My dial out worked the night that I started the clean This is to be expected, IMO. > install. I had copied /etc onto a backup file system that wasn't > affected by the restructure. I had complications from an overclocked Sounds like a good idea. I copy everything out to a jaz cartridge prior to upgrading. > Celeron 300a that was dying in the middle of all of this. Once I > resinstalled the slower Celeron 433a, everything worked fine and the I'm on a 300A, it's been running since I bought it at 450MHz with no problems under any of the 4 OS's I use. Rock solid. Mainboard is an Abit BH6. I've occasionally switched it down when I suspected OC'ing hangs, but these turned out to be Windows problems (Microsoft), not the hardware. I don't recall how long I've had the new board/CPU, but I think over a year now. > clean install involved the least effort on my part since I started > using FreeBSD-2.2.8. Of course. But since I don't have the media.... I suppose I could download the ISO and burn it onto a CD under Win98, but I think the ISO is significantly larger than an upgrade would be (not sure, MB/download time-wise what the difference would be). > > 2. XFree86 3.3.4 - XFree86 3.3.6 or possibly the new 4.0 that just came out (if > > I recall correctly). Should I remove the 3.3.4 package and reinstall the newer > > version, or can I install over the old to preserve my settings? Should one use > > the ports/packages collection directly, go via /stand/sysinstall (which > > basically seems to do the same thing, but is automated) or compile from source? > > I haven't tried XFree86-4.0 yet. Do I uninstall 3.3.4 first, or install 4.0 over it? > > 3. KDE 1.1.1 - KDE 1.1.2 - much of the same questions apply here, and it > > requires several packages that aren't in 3.3 (or 4.0 I beleive, Mesa, QT, some > > other stuff). When I try to install the newer packages they conflict with other > > installed stuff. Should I remove older versions before installing newer ones, > > or can one "upgrade" by simply installing over the old install (I notice that > > pkg_info then reports several versions, and it might make removing one later > > impossible if they have common files....). When trying to remove older versions > > I get messages about other packages requiring them, and the removal is aborted. > > I could force removal, but wouldn't that mess up the dependency information? > > Even after I reinstall a newer version? > > Normally, I follow the instructions from "pkg_version -c". It > frequently shows a "-f" option to force the removal. Just don't do > anything to develop the uzi_foot_syndrome, i.e., modify your x-libs > while you are running x. I think KDE is really frequent contributor to > the ufs awards - the computer equivalent of the Darwin Award :). I'll look into pkg_version -c, I've seen -f, but don't want everything getting out of sync with each other. What's ufs awards? What's Darwin award? > > 4. General upgrading of non-system components (programs, libraries, etc) > > For example, Netscape Communicator 4.61 to 4.72 or newer, AbiWord 0.5.5 to > > 0.7.6, etc. Should one uninstall the exisiting package/port before installing > > the newer one, or simply install over the old one? Some programs (either ports, > > packages or free standing dists) require newer (or different) versions of > > certain libraries, toolkits, etc. Should one go ahead and upgrade this as well, > > or install it in parallell to the older version? It seems the system components > > only end up less and less in sync with each other that way. > > I installed Netscape for Linux 4.72 at my original install. It worked > on the first connection to the Internet. What more can I say. Murphy As does my 4.61 version (although the fonts/scaling often make it impossible to read a page). > usually sits on my shoulder and if there are 2+ bugs, I will see one > of them. Don't uninstall until you have a good build of a port. Then, > you do the pkg_delete and "make install". A package is already build > and you need to do the pkg_delete first and then pkg_add. And when pkg_delete refuses because of dependancies, what do you do then..? BTW - where do you store your src files once downloaded? I learned to put them in /usr/src or /usr/local/src, but this doesn't seem to go well with FreeBSD's directory sttructure. > Good luck, > Kent Thanks, Thor To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?00042414201300.00309>