From owner-freebsd-questions Thu Dec 7 22:19:37 1995 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id WAA02275 for questions-outgoing; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 22:19:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from server.wulaw.wustl.edu (server.wulaw.wustl.edu [128.252.251.249]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA02270 for ; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 22:19:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from matt ([128.252.30.219]) by server.wulaw.wustl.edu (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id AAA19233 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 1995 00:18:08 -0600 Message-ID: <30C7D8A1.2484@server.wulaw.wustl.edu> Date: Fri, 08 Dec 1995 00:18:09 -0600 From: Matt Rosenberg Organization: Washington University School of Law X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b3 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: questions@freebsd.org Subject: upgrade to 2.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk I have completely upgraded my system from 2.0.5 to 2.1 using the install disk "update" function. (BTW, Jordan, extremely user friendly and easy to upgrade - bravo! - though I have this suggestion: tell people to just tar their entire /etc directory and save it somewhere else before upgrading). A friend is also running 2.0.5 but has no CD-ROM and only a 28.8 PPP connection so an upgrade would be quite slow. I was wondering if there would be any problem, in theory, with just compiling a 2.1 kernel on my system and installing the kernel only on the other system. Would that gain any advantages over what he's running now? Would there be any potential problems with that? -- ============================================= Matt Rosenberg Washington University School of Law St. Louis, MO, USA matt@www.wulaw.wustl.edu http://www.wulaw.wustl.edu/~matt/ =============================================