From owner-freebsd-install  Wed Sep 27 17:59:33 1995
Return-Path: owner-install
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id RAA21119
          for install-outgoing; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 17:59:33 -0700
Received: from ref.tfs.com (ref.tfs.com [140.145.254.251])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id RAA21098
          ; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 17:59:29 -0700
Received: (from julian@localhost) by ref.tfs.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id RAA13413; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 17:58:13 -0700
From: Julian Elischer <julian@ref.tfs.com>
Message-Id: <199509280058.RAA13413@ref.tfs.com>
Subject: Re: "Installation" and "upgrade"
To: terry@lambert.org (Terry Lambert)
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 17:58:12 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: terry@lambert.org, jkh@time.cdrom.com, chuckr@eng.umd.edu,
        richard@harlequin.co.uk, freebsd-install@freebsd.org,
        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199509271723.KAA10418@phaeton.artisoft.com> from "Terry Lambert" at Sep 27, 95 10:23:35 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 408       
Sender: owner-install@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

> 
> > but an old fs is stil a valid fs under the new scheme!
> 
> Just never a clean one?  8-).
> 
> Remeber also that if one were upgrading from all the way back, the reserved
> space for the bootblock has gotten larger.  8-(.
I don't think so....

> 
> 
> 					Terry Lambert
> 					terry@lambert.org
> ---
> Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
> or previous employers.
>