From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 6 09:36:55 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2976316A4CE for ; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 09:36:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from makeworld.com (chcgil2-ar9-4-60-214-019.chcgil2.dsl-verizon.net [4.60.214.19]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A23D543D39 for ; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 09:36:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from racerx@makeworld.com) Received: from evrtwa1-ar12-4-46-162-188.evrtwa1.dsl-verizon.net (racerx@evrtwa1-ar12-4-46-162-188.evrtwa1.dsl-verizon.net [4.46.162.188]) by makeworld.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i26Haq0P096571 for ; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 11:36:53 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from racerx@makeworld.com) From: Chris To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 11:36:51 -0600 User-Agent: KMail/1.6 References: <20040306145348.B69AD2B4DAA@mail.evilcoder.org> <200403061725.I26HPACF063197@asarian-host.net> <200403061129.13742.racerx@makeworld.com> In-Reply-To: <200403061129.13742.racerx@makeworld.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200403061136.51822.racerx@makeworld.com> Subject: Re: Where is 4.9-STABLE? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 17:36:55 -0000 On Saturday 06 March 2004 11:29 am, Chris wrote: > On Saturday 06 March 2004 11:25 am, Mark wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Kirk Strauser" > > To: > > Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 5:08 PM > > Subject: Re: Where is 4.9-STABLE? > > > > > At 2004-03-06T14:53:44Z, "Remko Lodder" writes: > > > > and do a make world > > > > > > Mark: don't literally do a "make world". Follow the instructions > > > in /usr/src/UPDATING instead. > > Doing a make world is perfectly acceptable. It's considered the > "traditional" way of doing things, and accomplishes the same results. > > If your going to inform users NOT to do one way opposed to another, at > least give specifics as to why you feel that way. To follow up - the reason for the UPDATING file and the layout of rebuilding your system is to guide users that are upgrading from 4.x to 5.x You will see vast changes in the way the kernel is handled in 5.x along with /dev However, reading that file explains this in detail. Simply moving from 4.9-RELEASE to 4.9-STABLE and the patches isn't considered a major upgrade. A simple rebuild of the kernel and a simple make world does work well in this instance. -- Best regards, Chris