You used the upgrade in place from source so the old kernel release
version was left over by error. Try doing an separate stand alone
kernel recompile and the kernel.old is not created.  This problem is
more visible for people who install 5.x from scratch.

Or maybe this is a difference between using the new buildkernal
process over the older kernel compile process.

All I know for sure is I installed 5.2.1 from miniistall.iso install
CD and used the older kernel compile process to build a custom
kernel and the kernel.old module was not created and the
kernel.generic module was never there.

So what I am saying is you may be trying to run the kernel.old
module from 5.1 and not the one you think you built from 5.2.1.

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Moran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2004 11:01 AM
Subject: Re: safe mode for kernel.old


> I think you have missed some very important details. In 4.x
> when you do a kernel compile the system automatically renames the
> current kernel to kernel.old for you. There is also a
> which is always there.
> In 5.x versions the whole kernel boot process was replaced with
> method and the auto rename of the kernel no longer happens on a
> recompile and there is no kernel.generic module available.
> added the new boot process to 5.x did real poor job of integrating
> the new pirated boot code into Freebsd.  This should be reported
> a bug by everybody who wants the old kernel rename  process added
> back into FreeBSD.

What are you talking about?  I did a cvsup/make kernel process just
week ago on a 5.1 machine, and the 5.2 kernel refused to work with
network card.  Lucky for me, kernel.old was in the boot directory,
I was able to move it back over kernel.

Yes, the process and everything is different, but the basic fallback
device is still there.

> Submit Bug report.
> -----Original Message-----
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jason
> Barnes
> Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 7:31 PM
> To: Jonathan Chen
> Subject: Re: safe mode for kernel.old
> On Sat, 31 Jul 2004, Jonathan Chen wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 30, 2004 at 03:50:40PM -0700, Jason Barnes wrote:
> > >
> > >     Wow -- this is weird, but when I try that the machine
> up
> > > right after loading the old kernel, after the little -/|\
> finishes.
> > > Additionally, safe mode and single-user mode are distinct.  Is
> there a
> > > boot -safe that will boot into SAFE mode?
> > >     Thanks for your help,
> >
> > Unlike Windows, there is no SAFE mode. Single user mode is about
> as
> > safe as it will get.
>         Then what's the safe mode in the boot screen in 5.2.1, and
> how is
> it different than single user mode?  Thanks for your patience with
> me on
> this issue.
>                                 - Jason
> _______________________________________________
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> _______________________________________________
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to

Bill Moran
Potential Technologies

[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to