Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 23:23:52 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org> To: Bob Johnson <bob@eng.ufl.edu> Cc: dcs@newsguy.com, nickhead@folino.com, stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: KERNCONF instead of KERNEL? Message-ID: <200103030623.f236Nqd61701@harmony.village.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 02 Mar 2001 13:52:33 EST." <3A9FEBF1.8C1A5AC4@eng.ufl.edu> References: <3A9FEBF1.8C1A5AC4@eng.ufl.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <3A9FEBF1.8C1A5AC4@eng.ufl.edu> Bob Johnson writes: : You can't reboot to single user mode when you are doing a remote : update. He is specifically asking about the best way to do : a remote update. You have to do everything multiuser and accept : the risk, but there is still the question of what order minimizes : the risk. Yes, but make sure that you test the level you are going from to the level you are going to before risking booting into single user. I recently took a 3.2R system to 4.2-stable, but found that I had to walk over to the console to reboot it in single user mode when the 4.x binaries wouldn't run on the 3.x system after I tried to do it in the wrong order (installworld before installkernel). Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200103030623.f236Nqd61701>