Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 12:28:06 +0200 From: Andreas Rudisch <cyb.@gmx.net> To: Istvan Gabor <suseuser04@lajt.hu> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD update Message-ID: <20121009122806.bfbc77cae06b6a5416cf8164@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <7acef32e.2caae151.5073f296.83c70@lajt.hu> References: <1922c43c.49710c96.5072e8a8.f2f51@lajt.hu> <20121008173551.e2cc1aad608d691d426a640e@gmx.net> <7acef32e.2caae151.5073f296.83c70@lajt.hu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 11:47:02 +0200 Istvan Gabor <suseuser04@lajt.hu> wrote: > FreeBSD Handbook (at the end of section 25.2.2) says: > > "However, freebsd-update will always update the /usr/src/sys/conf/newvers.sh file. > The current patch level (as indicated by the -p number reported by uname -r) is obtained > from this file. Rebuilding your custom kernel, even if nothing else changed, will allow > uname(1) to accurately report the current patch level of the system." > > From this I conclude that if I rebuild the kernel (the general kernel, not a custom kernel), > it should reflect patch level correctly. Yes. > This raises another question: are the updates made sequentially, as p1, p2, etc.? > This would explain why the kernel stayed at p3 level while the system was updated to > p4. Yes. > I Suppose if the update was done in one step after fetching and applying all > update patches the kernel should reflect the system's patch level. Is this correct? Well, it 'should', but it does not, since freebsd-update does not work that way. p4 did not require rebuilding the kernel, so it had not been done. > I am confused a little bit. Feel free to browse the mailing lists, you are not the first one to be confused. Andreas -- GnuPG key : 0x2A573565 | http://www.gnupg.org/howtos/de/ Fingerprint: 925D 2089 0BF9 8DE5 9166 33BB F0FD CD37 2A57 3565
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20121009122806.bfbc77cae06b6a5416cf8164>