From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Mar 2 22:24:15 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.bsdimp.com [204.144.255.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8831037B719 for ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 22:24:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Received: from harmony.village.org (localhost.village.org [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f236Nqd61701; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 23:23:52 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Message-Id: <200103030623.f236Nqd61701@harmony.village.org> To: Bob Johnson Subject: Re: KERNCONF instead of KERNEL? Cc: dcs@newsguy.com, nickhead@folino.com, stable@FreeBSD.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> Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 23:23:52 -0700 From: Warner Losh Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG 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