Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 22:38:39 +0200 From: Szilveszter Adam <sziszi@petra.hos.u-szeged.hu> To: doug@safeport.com Cc: doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: How do I upgrade from 3.X -> 4.X? Message-ID: <20001015223839.C27296@petra.hos.u-szeged.hu> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0010151325470.10879-100000@pemaquid.safeport.com>; from doug@safeport.com on Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 03:49:03PM -0400 References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0010151325470.10879-100000@pemaquid.safeport.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 03:49:03PM -0400, doug@safeport.com wrote: > I was looking for the best way to have a relatively non-technical > coworker maintain FreeBSD on a laptop with small (2GB) disk. In reading > "How do I upgrade from 3.X -> 4.X?" in the FAQ section I found: > > A: We strongly recommend that you use binary snapshots to do > this. 4-STABLE snapshots are available at releng4.FreeBSD.org. > > If you wish to upgrade using source, please see the FreeBSD > Handbook for more information. > > Upgrading via source is never recommended for new users, and > upgading from 3.X -> 4.X is even less so; make sure you have read > the instructions carefully before attempting to upgrade via source > this! I think this is correct. Upgrading via source presumes some familiarity with the code and also some exprience with regard to compiling sources etc while a binary upgrade certainly is more suited for beginners. Also, bear in mind that even someone who has UNIX experience already might find the process of 'making world' very new since I am not aware of any other OS (free or otherwise) that would give you such upgrade opportunities. Plus, with source upgrades there is always the possibility that it does not even compile. This happens on -CURRENT almost every other day, but can happen on -STABLE too. > However from ftp://releng4.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/README-40.TXT: > > ----------------------------------------- > FreeBSD 4.1 --- SNAPSHOT Version > ----------------------------------------- > > This is a snapshot release of the 4.1.1-stable (RELENG_4) branch > which is currently moving towards the release of 4.2. > : > : > TARGET AUDIENCE: > ---------------- > > This release is aimed primarily at early-adopters and the various > other folks who want to get involved with the ongoing development > of FreeBSD and are willing to deal with a few bumps in the road. > We do our best to ensure that each snapshot works as advertised, > but tracking -stable is a process which sometimes has its off > days. > : > : > > Was there a change in philosophy? I don't think so. If you look at the above, it only says that since this is a snapshot (generated daily) not an official release, there is a possibility that it might contain bugs that may have been corrected by tomorrow. I think the original philosophy behind this is something like this: 1) There are the official releases, which are printed on CDs and made available to the world at large. These are supposed to be appropriate entry-points for newbies as well and are supposed to be the stablest builds. Although lately some nasty bugs always kept creeping in to the -RELEASE builds which even made it necessary to recall one release, which is unprecedented. I would say, that the most stable builds are those approx one week *after* the release date, because by then these nasty little things become known and get fixed. Unfortunately this requires that a large number of people jump on the wagon and tease the new -RELEASE enough to find these. 2) There are the -STABLE snaps. These are generated from the code of the -STABLE branch so they are supposed to be reasonably stable. Also, they have already been compiled, so at least this is not your problem:-) These contain the latest bugfixes (including security enchancements) but on the other hand may also introduce new bugs. There is currently no "official" way in FreeBSD to just get the fixes but not the new features. 3) There is the -STABLE source at any given moment that you can retrieve in a variety of ways. Normally no more "dangerous" than 2) but since it's up to you to compile it, it may or may not be for you. It is a good idea to start with binary updates but as you learn more (and if your machine can satisfy some hw requirements) you can switch to source upgrades. However, strictly speaking there is no "need" to do this for someone who is only "little technical" 4) There is -CURRENT which is a big no-no for any non-development purpose. > >From the README file I would think the best way for non-technical people > would be to install 4.x from CD-ROM, FTP, or whatever and then put local > etc changes back by hand. > > It seems to me, the best answer to my real question is to maintain the > source tree on a larger system, maintain that with cvsup and NFS mount > the source tree to build and install packages etc. Yes, there are situations where this the best option. > Two questions: if this is correct, is there some guidance on doing this? I am not aware of any special document on this. People have been told to search mailing list archives (and they keep asking it anyway again and again.) > If not, I would be happy to write one to contribute. I would be happy to > take a shot at this regardless of the proper answer to the question. Go for it!:-) The more documentation, the better. I cannot do it since I have never actually tried it. This is the way docs are born: You find it out the hard way and document for everybody else. Unfortunately, people keep forgetting part 2 of the sentence... (Which is to remind me that I should write up a new formatting-media tutorial, because the present one is quite a bit outdated and I have just done a full migration of my system to a new, bigger disk.) -- Regards: Szilveszter ADAM Szeged University Szeged Hungary To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001015223839.C27296>