On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 06:21:40PM -0400, Indigo 23 wrote:
Does anyone think that its worth the hassle? If you do manage to get
it up and running, will you see any noticeable advantages or is it
better to just stick with i386? The only caveat that I can see is a
recompilation of all the
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 12:04:01PM +0200, Roland Smith wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 06:21:40PM -0400, Indigo 23 wrote:
Does anyone think that its worth the hassle? If you do manage to get
it up and running, will you see any noticeable advantages or is it
better to just stick with i386?
Hi,
i have another Way that might be good, also for remote
take over.
You know Colin's depenguinator?
I have made my own new depenguinator, that could install
a complete base-system by building it on another box.
Anyone interested? I have written an Howto, that is at the time
not online.
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, Kris Kennaway wrote:
I may have had to use the statically linked /rescue to do some things,
I don't remember. It's not completely trivial, but someone who knows
their way around a FreeBSD system can do it.
We did it by using miniroot on swap partition of the system disk.
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 03:38:29AM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote:
Indigo 23 wrote:
the ports? (I already know that it does require a recompilation of
world and the kernel).
AFAIK nobody has succeeded in this (i.e. upgrading i386 to amd64 via
buildkernel/world) on-line far
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 12:21:42PM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 03:38:29AM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote:
Indigo 23 wrote:
the ports? (I already know that it does require a recompilation of
world and the kernel).
AFAIK nobody has succeeded in this
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 04:19:21PM -0400, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 12:21:42PM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 03:38:29AM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote:
Indigo 23 wrote:
the ports? (I already know that it does require a
Does anyone think that its worth the hassle? If you do manage to get
it up and running, will you see any noticeable advantages or is it
better to just stick with i386? The only caveat that I can see is a
recompilation of all the ports. Any thoughts?
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 11:52:34PM +0300, Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 04:19:21PM -0400, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 12:21:42PM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 03:38:29AM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote:
Indigo 23
On 17/06/07, Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 11:52:34PM +0300, Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 04:19:21PM -0400, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 12:21:42PM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 01:02:05AM +0200, Marcus Kaatari wrote:
On 17/06/07, Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 11:52:34PM +0300, Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 04:19:21PM -0400, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 12:21:42PM +0200, Ivan
Indigo 23 wrote:
the ports? (I already know that it does require a recompilation of
world and the kernel).
AFAIK nobody has succeeded in this (i.e. upgrading i386 to amd64 via
buildkernel/world) on-line far enough to tell the tale. You might be the
first :)
signature.asc
Description:
I was just wondering if one were to upgrade a FreeBSD installation
from i386 to amd64, would it require a complete recompilation of all
the ports? (I already know that it does require a recompilation of
world and the kernel).
Thanks.
___
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 03:38:29AM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote:
Indigo 23 wrote:
the ports? (I already know that it does require a recompilation of
world and the kernel).
AFAIK nobody has succeeded in this (i.e. upgrading i386 to amd64 via
buildkernel/world) on-line far enough to tell the
14 matches
Mail list logo
