On Saturday 06 March 2004 09:29 am, Chris wrote:
> On Saturday 06 March 2004 11:25 am, Mark wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Kirk Strauser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 5:08 PM
> > Subject: Re: Where is 4.9-STABLE?
> >
> > > At 2004-03-06T14:53:44Z, "Remko Lodder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
writes:
> > > > and do a make world
> > >
> > > Mark: don't literally do a "make world".  Follow the instructions
> > > in /usr/src/UPDATING instead.
>
> Doing a make world is perfectly acceptable. It's considered the
> "traditional" way of doing things, and accomplishes the same results.
>
> If your going to inform users NOT to do one way opposed to another,
> at least give specifics as to why you feel that way.

That is really true. If you had done a make world going from 5.1 to 5.2, 
you would have had to use the fixit disk to recover your system. If 
that didn't work, you would have had to do a reinstall. The only safe 
step is make kernel. The rest are separated for your benefit. 

There was an upgrade in the binutils by O'Brien around 4.0 or 4.1 and 
make world didn't work there either. There have also been a few 
occasions when a new kernel would immediately panic. If you found this 
out during your boot to single user mode, it wasn't a big deal because 
you could load the old kernel and continue as if nothing was wrong 
until it was fixed. If you had used make world and you had a completely 
updated system, recovery was much more involved.

Kent

-- 
Kent Stewart
Richland, WA

http://users.owt.com/kstewart/index.html
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to