From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 6 11:49:13 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 1761616A4CE for ; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 11:49:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.owt.com (smtp.owt.com [204.118.6.19]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C78CC43D1F for ; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 11:49:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kstewart@owt.com) Received: from localhost.invalid (owt-207-41-94-233.owt.com [207.41.94.233]) by smtp.owt.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i26JmwfH017230; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 11:48:58 -0800 From: Kent Stewart To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 11:49:11 -0800 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: <200403061149.11743.kstewart@owt.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 19:49:13 -0000 On Saturday 06 March 2004 09:29 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. That is really true. If you had done a make world going from 5.1 to 5.2, you would have had to use the fixit disk to recover your system. If that didn't work, you would have had to do a reinstall. The only safe step is make kernel. The rest are separated for your benefit. There was an upgrade in the binutils by O'Brien around 4.0 or 4.1 and make world didn't work there either. There have also been a few occasions when a new kernel would immediately panic. If you found this out during your boot to single user mode, it wasn't a big deal because you could load the old kernel and continue as if nothing was wrong until it was fixed. If you had used make world and you had a completely updated system, recovery was much more involved. Kent -- Kent Stewart Richland, WA http://users.owt.com/kstewart/index.html