From owner-freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Wed Jan 25 10:39:29 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00AF3CBFC2F; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 10:39:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ticso@cicely7.cicely.de) Received: from raven.bwct.de (raven.bwct.de [195.149.99.3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "raven.bwct.de", Issuer "raven.bwct.de" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A133EE92; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 10:39:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ticso@cicely7.cicely.de) Received: from mail.cicely.de ([10.1.1.37]) by raven.bwct.de (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id v0PAdIY1085143 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 25 Jan 2017 11:39:18 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from ticso@cicely7.cicely.de) Received: from cicely7.cicely.de (cicely7.cicely.de [10.1.1.9]) by mail.cicely.de (8.14.5/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v0PAdFC6051060 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 25 Jan 2017 11:39:15 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from ticso@cicely7.cicely.de) Received: from cicely7.cicely.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cicely7.cicely.de (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id v0PAdFSc008013; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 11:39:15 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from ticso@cicely7.cicely.de) Received: (from ticso@localhost) by cicely7.cicely.de (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id v0PAdFo0008012; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 11:39:15 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from ticso) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 11:39:15 +0100 From: Bernd Walter To: Daniel Braniss Cc: ticso@cicely.de, Kurt Jaeger , Bernd Walter , freebsd-arm@freebsd.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 11.0-RC1 unsupported by ports? Message-ID: <20170125103914.GD7817@cicely7.cicely.de> Reply-To: ticso@cicely.de References: <20170125042413.GK85666@cicely7.cicely.de> <20170125062045.GS13006@home.opsec.eu> <20170125075459.GL85666@cicely7.cicely.de> <20170125081318.GT13006@home.opsec.eu> <20170125084738.GM85666@cicely7.cicely.de> <41DFEC72-FA4B-4065-B057-D29EF43BD494@cs.huji.ac.il> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <41DFEC72-FA4B-4065-B057-D29EF43BD494@cs.huji.ac.il> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD cicely7.cicely.de 10.2-RELEASE amd64 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED=-1, BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.507 autolearn=ham version=3.3.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.0 (2010-01-18) on spamd.cicely.de X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 10:39:29 -0000 On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 11:52:10AM +0200, Daniel Braniss wrote: > > > On 25 Jan 2017, at 10:47, Bernd Walter wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 09:13:18AM +0100, Kurt Jaeger wrote: > >> Hi! > >> > >>>> 11.0-RC1 was superseded by 11.0-REL, so while that message is a bit > >>>> drastic, there's a point to it. > >>> > >>> With that argument only the latest version would be supported. > >> > >> https://www.freebsd.org/releases/ lists the supported releases. > >> There are no release candidates listed. > >> > >>> That said, it is a release candidate and as such one could argue that > >>> there never had been any official support at all. > >>> In that case however the message is wrong, because when a support has > >>> ended it implies that there was support. > >>> > >>> The check in the code is this one: > >>> .if (${OPSYS} == FreeBSD && (${OSVERSION} < 1003000 || (${OSVERSION} >= 1100000 && ${OSVERSION} < 1100122))) || \ > >>> (${OPSYS} == DragonFly && ${DFLYVERSION} < 400400) > >>> > >>> It is not about RC as such, it is explicitly about 11.0-RC. > >>> My OSVERSION is 1100121. > >>> So obviously support starts with the first release. > >>> Fair enough, but then the message is still wrong unless it was supported. > >> > >> What's stopping you from upgrading to -REL ? > > > > Buildworld on a raspberry isn't fun - if it works at all. > > Even if you crossbuild and just copy the binaries, the wear of > > MicroSD cards isn't something you want to test unless you really > > have to. > > most of the time this works for me: > mount host:/export-to-rpi/local /usr/local > echo ???WRKDIRPREFIX=/var/tmp??? >> /etc/make.conf > mount via nfs /var/tmp, i.e. > mount host:/export-to-rpi/tmp /var/tmp > also add swap via nfs: > mount host:/export-to-rpi/swap /mnt-swap > swapon /mnt-swap This has nothing to do with updating the OS itself. That said, I assume host:/export-to-rpi/local is only used by a single host. It gets tricky with shared /usr/local, since the package registration is in a different path and ports/packages may also touch /etc - e.g. /etc/shells, or add service users for a specific software. It is possible to do, but unless you are very carefull things can easily get messy. Same goes for /tmp. Needless to say that swap isn't to be shared at all... But I'm not sure if swap on NFS is completely deadlock free. -- B.Walter http://www.bwct.de Modbus/TCP Ethernet I/O Baugruppen, ARM basierte FreeBSD Rechner uvm.