From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 3 22:14:09 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: FreeBSD-Questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D065410656D7 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 22:14:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from weak.local (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F2BF8FC16; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 22:14:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <47CC782D.3090005@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 23:14:05 +0100 From: Kris Kennaway User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Macintosh/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kevin Kinsey References: <47CC36C9.7020402@daleco.biz> <47CC5E2A.8090800@FreeBSD.org> <47CC72C8.5070905@daleco.biz> In-Reply-To: <47CC72C8.5070905@daleco.biz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: philip@ridecharge.com, FreeBSD-Questions Subject: Re: Uname borked on ??-Release... X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 22:14:09 -0000 Kevin Kinsey wrote: > Kris Kennaway wrote: >> Kevin Kinsey wrote: >> > > > >>> I get the following from uname -a: >>> >>> FreeBSD archangel.daleco.biz 6.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE #6: >>> Sat Jun 2 09:22:50 CDT 2007 root@archangel.daleco.biz: >>> /usr/obj/backup/src/sys/GENERIC i386 >>> >>> However, I rebuilt world, more or less without issues, >>> twice in February with "RELENG_6" in the supfile. This >>> didn't change uname's output, and that worried me a bit. >>> >>> So, to make matters bette^H^H^H^Hadder, I csup'ped >>> to RELENG_7_0 the day after it was released, read >>> /usr/src/UPDATING, and the webpage detailing the >>> upgrade, and did another buildworld/kernel cycle. >>> Now I have no idea if I'm on 6 or 7 (seems like >>> 7, but many ports issues, and I've rebuilt them >>> all), and it's just becoming a major PITA. >> >> >> You didnt succeed in installing the new kernel. 'make installkernel' >> is the step in which this occurs. >> >> Kris > > Thank you and Phillip for answering my post. However, > I've done this 3 times now, and I don't skip that step. > There have been no errors in the process, either. > > AAMOF, in response to Phillip's mail, I just did it > again, as you can see (z* is to omit snipping): > > ll /boot/kernel/z* > -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 712006 Mar 3 15:16 /boot/kernel/zfs.ko* > -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 3471592 Mar 3 15:16 > /boot/kernel/zfs.ko.symbols* > -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 38175 Mar 3 15:16 /boot/kernel/zlib.ko* > -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 58834 Mar 3 15:16 > /boot/kernel/zlib.ko.symbols* > > I've rebooted the system, and I'm still being told I'm running > 6.2 by uname. In addition, pkg_add thinks I should be looking > for 6-latest packages instead of 7, and the list of annoyances > continues. And, "hmm", symbols? I'm guessing that knob is ON > in FBSD7? Once again, proof that something's wrong, as I didn't > build debugging kernels in FBSD6 ... so I'm thinking this is > a 7 kernel? It just doesn't make sense to me. > > It *is* a Monday, after all. > If installkernel didn't succeed, shouldn't there be any > other evidence? Could skipping a mergemaster at some point > have this effect? (I don't *always* do that, unless I'm making a pretty > big move, and the first build cycle was > production code IIRC) > > What about issues with "newvers.sh" (or whatever it is?) > Any other think-outside-the-box stuff? What could cause > an installkernel operation to fail but appear to succeed? Possibly you have 6.x sources still. Or you are not actually booting /boot/kernel/kernel but some other kernel. Check sysctl kern.bootfile. You can also do strings /boot/kernel/kernel | grep 7.0-RELEASE to verify the kernel version string. Kris