On 2022-04-03, Steve Fairhead <[email protected]> wrote: > On 07/11/2021 10:35, Steve Fairhead wrote: >> >> That's what I'd expect, and I did indeed run sysupgrade without specific >> options. Nonetheless I seem to have wound up with -current when I would >> have expected -stable: >> >> # dmesg | grep OpenBSD >> OpenBSD 6.9-stable (GENERIC.MP) #0: Mon Aug 23 21:44:18 BST 2021 >> OpenBSD 6.9-stable (GENERIC.MP) #0: Sun Oct 31 10:03:46 GMT 2021 >> OpenBSD 6.9-stable (GENERIC.MP) #0: Sun Oct 31 10:03:46 GMT 2021 >> OpenBSD 7.0-current (RAMDISK_CD) #71: Fri Nov 5 10:13:26 MDT 2021 >> OpenBSD 7.0-current (GENERIC.MP) #72: Fri Nov 5 10:08:43 MDT 2021 >> OpenBSD 7.0-stable (GENERIC.MP) #0: Sat Nov 6 13:30:45 GMT 2021 >> OpenBSD 7.0-stable (GENERIC.MP) #0: Sat Nov 6 16:15:08 GMT 2021 >> OpenBSD 7.0-stable (GENERIC.MP) #0: Sat Nov 6 19:53:47 GMT 2021 >> >> I have no idea how this can have happened. I would dearly love to >> understand what I did wrong. > > I *finally* figured out what happened, after some experimenting with a > spare machine. Running sysupgrade with no parameters on -stable (i.e. > -release + patches, rebuilt) upgrades to a snapshot (i.e. -current). > > Is this expected behaviour?
sysupgrade only copes with what look like release versions (no version suffix, upgrades to release+0.1 with no arguments, or snapshot with -s) or snapshots (-current or -beta suffix, by default -current upgrades to release+0.1 or -beta upgrades to release, or snapshot with -s). It doesn't handle -stable, and it doesn't handle going from the current situation which is "it's still snapshots rather than release but there's no suffix" to the forthcoming release.
