From owner-freebsd-stable Sat Jan 15 4:41:33 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from m0.cs.berkeley.edu (m0.CS.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.45.176]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7758C14C3B for ; Sat, 15 Jan 2000 04:41:30 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from asami@stampede.cs.berkeley.edu) Received: from silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (sji-ca44-58.ix.netcom.com [209.111.212.186]) by m0.cs.berkeley.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA90794; Sat, 15 Jan 2000 04:41:27 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from asami@stampede.cs.berkeley.edu) Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (8.9.3/8.6.9) id EAA83400; Sat, 15 Jan 2000 04:41:22 -0800 (PST) To: Marcel Moolenaar Cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Problems with linux_base-6.1 References: <387E163E.16722C62@scc.nl> <3880386E.A83AB6BA@scc.nl> From: asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) Date: 15 Jan 2000 04:41:19 -0800 In-Reply-To: Marcel Moolenaar's message of "Sat, 15 Jan 2000 10:05:50 +0100" Message-ID: Lines: 42 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.5 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * From: Marcel Moolenaar * > I don't assume the kernel can be safely loaded on older release * > kernels to get the desired effect? * * I don't want to promote that. People should upgrade the complete kernel * source at a minimum, IMO. Since I specifically noted that the mail * applies to FreeBSD-stable, I assume they know how to update sources * (otherwise they wouldn't be running -stable). Yes, that's what I figured. (Just checking.) * > In that case, I can't put them in * > the upgrade kits, can you modify the port to check ${OSVERSION} and * > exit with a message if the user's system is too old? * * Is that necessary? The ports collection isn't designed for older * systems. Most of the ports will work anyway, but some of them don't. No. There are millions out there who want to run the latest ports with release systems. That's why I make "upgrade kits" to help them. * linux_base-6.1 will work on 3.3-RELEASE as well IIRC, that doesn't mean * that the linux kernel module is up to it; but that the story of the its * life :-) * * I deliberately waited until well after 3.4 to upgrade the port, so that * it will be in 4.0 and we have enough time to fix any problems on -stable * for 3.5. * * People running into problems now should be running -stable, not 3.4 * release or older, right? I'm not sure what you mean here, do people with 3.3R and 3.4R run into problems with linux_base? Or are you saying they shouldn't be running linux_base from ports-current? If it's the latter, please add the check, given the nature of your work I understand that it is impossible to make it work on older releases, but those who try need to get a easy-to-understand message. -PW To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message