From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Feb 7 20:27:45 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from ghs.ssd.k12.wa.us (locutus.ghs.ssd.k12.wa.us [216.186.55.25]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE90B37B491 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 20:27:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (protozoa@localhost) by ghs.ssd.k12.wa.us (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA88200; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 20:27:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from protozoa@ghs.ssd.k12.wa.us) Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 20:23:08 -0800 (PST) From: Dan Feldman To: Matthew Emmerton Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav , Matthew Luckie , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: syscall kernel modules on 3.0-release In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hmm, I have exactly the same situation, a mission-critical server that can't be taken offline to do an upgrade. It's running 3.4, but with a few binaries from 4.0 that I needed to make our CGIs work (development is done on 4.2 :). Anyway, for the kernel it MIGHT be possible to "borrow" one from a nearby 4.0-series machine, install it, and reboot, taking the machine offline for a couple of minutes. This is obviously a bad idea, since userspace will still be 3.0, but it's something to think about. Sorry this is so OT. -- Dan Feldman On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, Matthew Emmerton wrote: > On 7 Feb 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > > Matthew Luckie writes: > > > I completely understand your plea to not use 3.0 release. > > > I am personally using 4.2-stable. Its not my decision to use 3.0 > > > I beleive the computers running 3.0 have been running it for several years > > > now - i.e. it was the latest available at the time. > > > > Well, it was a stupid decision at that time, and the decision not to > > upgrade or replace these machines now is even stupider. > > Hey now, go easy. Lots of stupid decisions are made by "managers" who > don't understand the implications of old(er) technology. > > I've got a 3.2-R machine which I'm forced to maintain, and the only reason > why it's not running 3.2-S or 4.2-S is because I can't take the stupid > thing offline. I've haggled with my boss for a 6 hour window and the > answer is no, no, no. I've even got a 3.2-S installation waiting in > /usr/obj. > > The only way I'm going to get my 3.2-R machine upgraded (and the only way > this person is going to get their 3.0-R machine upgraded) is when it > breaks and requires a complete reinstall to become operational. > > -- > Matt Emmerton > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message