From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 29 09:34:49 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0264016A4CE for ; Sat, 29 Nov 2003 09:34:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B07DA43FE5 for ; Sat, 29 Nov 2003 09:34:47 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fledge.watson.org (8.12.9p2/8.12.9) with ESMTP id hATHW9Mg058237; Sat, 29 Nov 2003 12:32:09 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Received: from localhost (robert@localhost)hATHW911058234; Sat, 29 Nov 2003 12:32:09 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Justin Smith In-Reply-To: <3FC8B734.6020400@drexel.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Upgrade experience 5.1p10->5.2 Beta X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 17:34:49 -0000 X-Original-Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 12:32:09 -0500 (EST) X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 17:34:49 -0000 I can't speak to most of these issues, but... On Sat, 29 Nov 2003, Justin Smith wrote: > First I tried making world and kernel from the cvsup'ed standard > supfile. This went OK. > > Then I did installkernel and installworld (in that order) and the second > step crashed with messages that shared libraries were missing. (It's as > if it installed some files before installing the shared libraries they > needed). Did you reboot between installkernel and installworld? It looks like there may be some source upgrade nits, but my understanding was that if you follow the complete directions in UPDATING, things should generally work well. The only difficulty I ran into upgrading from about 5.1-RELEASE to 5.2-JUSTBEFOREBETA a couple of weeks ago was that although the net 5.2-BETA / contents are much smaller than 5.1, during the upgrade you overlap lots of larger binaries, /rescue, and /lib, and the result is you briefly need more space rather than less space. The box in question was installed as 4.0-CURRENT, and had a very small / file system, and required a bit of manual adjustment to get forward as a result. > 1. Will the AGP performance be brought up to the level of 5.1p10 before > 5.2 is released (so I don't have to slow the AGP interface and can do > OpenGL)? Are you running with GENERIC from 5.2-BETA? If so, you may wish to recompile your kernel with WITNESS and INVARIANTS turned off and see if that helps. These debugging features are critical during the development process, but also seriously impact performance and might make the difference you're seeing. > 2. Why does the system fail in such an non-robust and uninformative > fashion? Why no error messages? Unfortunately, some classes of hardware/driver failures are very hard to convert to explicitly caught panics, especially where they involve the mechanism by which panics are displayed (system console), or low level memory management, etc. Many developers run with serial consoles so that they can still get access to console debugging information even when in X Windows, etc. Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects robert@fledge.watson.org Senior Research Scientist, McAfee Research