Date: Sun, 29 May 2005 11:28:26 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: "David P. Discher" <dpd@dpdtech.com> Cc: Steve Rikli <sr@genyosha.net>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 5.4 NFS install broken? Message-ID: <20050529182826.GA15632@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <39BC3BAA-5FA5-4C28-B6B9-156D68DB6B0D@dpdtech.com> References: <20050529014005.GA11940@dragon.genyosha.net> <39BC3BAA-5FA5-4C28-B6B9-156D68DB6B0D@dpdtech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--XsQoSWH+UP9D9v3l Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, May 29, 2005 at 11:25:05AM -0700, David P. Discher wrote: > Well, not broken, but its does not look like it was documented. >=20 > I was just doing this yesterday, copied ISO #1 completely, then in cd#2 >=20 > # cd /iso2/packages ; tar -cf - | tar -xvf - -C /nfsinstall/=20 > packages >=20 > The file packages/INDEX needs to be updated. I don't know how > to create this, so I went the ftp servers, and grabbed the INDEX > from the combined release. What was wrong with the INDEX from the ISO image? > There is a PROBLEM WITH THIS INDEX file. There are TWO entries for > perl in it. Perl 5.6.2 and 5.8.2 I do believe. The two CD ISOs > only contained perl 5.8.2. Vi and delete the 5.6.2 line, and > this seemed to work. (Don't quote me on exact version numbers.) This isn't a problem, they are two different packages coming from two different ports. Why do you think it was a problem?=20 Kris --XsQoSWH+UP9D9v3l Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFCmgnKWry0BWjoQKURApfrAJ4r2sdY8F1ttbXHkM+BygMTed2GRQCgvG+H 8ZBMo/NfQnf17WgnTm/Ggpo= =LNf8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --XsQoSWH+UP9D9v3l--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050529182826.GA15632>