From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 3 09:42:57 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0147F86D for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 09:42:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ob0-x233.google.com (mail-ob0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC314128F for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 09:42:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ob0-f179.google.com with SMTP id wo20so7566288obc.38 for ; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 01:42:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=bmr4Td4uSHp+YQJiWuTWSZ/XrMLYSIO15CxcWzDZ46s=; b=axrK6eHfhWlZpTneK6hj1Gak1MrRrr+2RD261NzGEUqqQ9d4g8kce3sclnDlPtaP6r aGABj71eXVP5izQJpK0eU1Ec23Lyjudscp9aThaLdlITz8l9rWzNbZglShdvIhkpUr8N eqdX/Xbex6V9D6bYz1MYWkCD5W3tWgs9pazvxnFQD4GcUJl08ry782fSNzT/bdMQh/1s iaYNXLm17Ol3/DlRCA7kg+Ldo6nhRVb9d8p0se3P4fA9hG+NtYpbRMCMi8sjEQIIaDaP BmjddpmfEC4iAtQCx7GqOhw/Fph/uCWnc3aUqABOjEzNO5YIgJ7oCR2LEy1WFI32IRGI g9pg== X-Received: by 10.182.135.194 with SMTP id pu2mr5464024obb.38.1391420575904; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 01:42:55 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.76.167.34 with HTTP; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 01:42:35 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20140202194510.4039ffb82d20d3c6d7c90c89@sohara.org> References: <1391320028595-5882151.post@n5.nabble.com> <20140202194510.4039ffb82d20d3c6d7c90c89@sohara.org> From: n j Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 10:42:35 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: The best approach to upgrade to freebsd 10 ? To: User Questions Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.17 X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2014 09:42:57 -0000 On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 8:45 PM, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote: > On Sat, 1 Feb 2014 21:47:08 -0800 (PST) > sw2wolf wrote: > > > I want to use freebsd-update first, then customize the kernel. Any > > suggestion is appreciated ! > > I just upgraded a VM from 9.1 to 10.0 by freebsd-update. I had to > go in two stages, first to 9.2 and then to 10.0 going from 9.1 to 10.0 gave > me an error. Once you get to 10.0 the first reboot is alarming, the > userland has real trouble driving the kernel and the network doesn't start. > It's OK though freebsd-update install and reboot and your ready to > recompile all your ports or reinstall all your packages which you'll need > to do before everything you had before works again. > A few days ago I did the (freebsd-update) upgrade of my VPS. I've been using FreeBSD since 4.8 and been running various releases and doing upgrades since then. This last upgrade (9.2-->10.0) was probably the worst, though I accept the blame for not reading /usr/src/UPDATING carefully. Here are the problems I ran into: 1) unable to boot after first stage of upgrade with "mounting ufs... error 19". This is explained in UPDATING entry 20110424 - basically, disk device names have been changed and the system was not able to find boot partition ad0s1a as it was renamed to ada0s1a. This is an old entry, but there were symbolic links to old device names throughout 9.x enabling the old configuration to work which I guess was removed on 20130404 ("Legacy ATA stack... completely removed from sources"). 2) network not working. I can't find this exactly in the UPDATING notes, but there was a lot of talk on Xen-related changes so I guess it was not much of a surprise. My NIC was renamed from re0 to xn0 hosing the ifconfig_re0 entries in rc.conf and ipfw "via" rules. 3) not actually a problem per se, but building a custom kernel with IPFIREWALL_FORWARD option I was using before failed with "unknown option". Again, this is in UPDATING entry 20121102 - option removed, functionality enabled by default. Finally! So take care if you share any of the above. 1) and 2) are especially problematic if you are running upgrade remotely. Regards, -- Nino