On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 01:41:18AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> but I suppose that just reflects a branch existing in the CVS repo.
Yes, and also that pullup ticket queues for -10 exist.
> I don't see any sign of the branch being supported at, say,
>
> https://nycdn.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD-daily/
>
"Thomas Mueller" writes:
> A couple days ago, didn't you say the branch was 10 hours away?
It says here that the branch has been made:
https://releng.netbsd.org
but I suppose that just reflects a branch existing in the CVS repo.
I don't see any sign of the branch being supported at, say,
On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 07:59:35PM +, Thomas Mueller wrote:
> > I will want to update my NetBSD installation from 9.99.82 from source
> > and am inclined toward 10.99.1 rather than 10.0_BETA. I use "cvs up
> > -dP -A" to update the source on base system and pkgsrc, currently am on
>
from nia:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 07:59:35PM +, Thomas Mueller wrote:
> > How will I be able to access (read-only OK) FFS2ea from NetBSD 9.99.82, and
> > what about compatibility with FreeBSD regarding file system? I assume no
> > compatibility with Linux.
> There will be no
On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 07:59:35PM +, Thomas Mueller wrote:
> I will want to update my NetBSD installation from 9.99.82 from source
> and am inclined toward 10.99.1 rather than 10.0_BETA. I use "cvs up
> -dP -A" to update the source on base system and pkgsrc, currently am on
> native X.
As
On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 07:59:35PM +, Thomas Mueller wrote:
> How will I be able to access (read-only OK) FFS2ea from NetBSD 9.99.82, and
> what about compatibility with FreeBSD regarding file system? I assume no
> compatibility with Linux.
>
There will be no compatibility with either,
> Just to wrap up this thread:
> - branch will probably happen in the next ~10h
> - default file system for new installations will be FFSv2
> I will update docs and extend the wiki page about FFS2ea to show how to
> switch later, and also provide installation instructions how to
Am 15.12.22 um 11:35 schrieb Martin Husemann:
Just to wrap up this thread:
- branch will probably happen in the next ~10h
- default file system for new installations will be FFSv2
I will update docs and extend the wiki page about FFS2ea to show how to
switch later, and also provide
Just to wrap up this thread:
- branch will probably happen in the next ~10h
- default file system for new installations will be FFSv2
I will update docs and extend the wiki page about FFS2ea to show how to
switch later, and also provide installation instructions how to select
FFSv2ea right
Hi Martin,
Martin Husemann wrote:
- unaware users may install FFSv2ea file systems and later find the need
to access them from older NetBSD kernels. "Downgrading" them is
quite easy using the ufs2ea-flip tool mentioned in the wiki page,
but it is not "plug & play".
- if FFSv2ea
On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 03:28:14PM +0100, Reinoud Zandijk wrote:
> related, I think we should really iron out all installation issues that
> plagued NetBSD before and were scorned on say Slashdot i.e. provide easy
> install/live images with a gui installed, with optional extra variants with
> say
Hi,
related, I think we should really iron out all installation issues that
plagued NetBSD before and were scorned on say Slashdot i.e. provide easy
install/live images with a gui installed, with optional extra variants with
say a complete xfce4 one with FF etc. and provide complete installs like
Robert Elz writes:
> | And it's not just NetBSD
>
> The relevant issue is, in that NetBSD10 might have EA support, but
> perhaps without them being enabled by default on anything, for which
> the solution, and its ramifications are a peculiarly NetBSD issue
> (the same thing does not apply to
Date:Fri, 09 Dec 2022 06:48:23 -0500
From:Greg Troxel
Message-ID:
| Not MESSAGE; this is not a "your hair is on fire" thing.
Probably not, but I'm not a samba user (or a user of anything which
might use samba) so the importance eludes me.
| And it's not just
On Fri, Dec 09, 2022 at 10:03:46AM +0100, Matthias Petermann wrote:
> compatibility. However, if I understand correctly, this only affects new
> installations? If I migrate an existing NetBSD 9 to 10, nothing changes in
> the file system format. I.e. as long as I do not actively initite the
>
Robert Elz writes:
> | - packets from pkgsrc (like samba) will continue to have the
> | corresponding options disabled by default
>
> Those packages could have warnings in DESCR and MESSAGE (or whatever it
> is called) advising of the need for FFSv2ea for full functionality.
> How
Hello Martin,
Am 08.12.22 um 20:21 schrieb Martin Husemann:
Now the question: should the default install really use this new FFS type,
or should it default to plain FFSv2?
thanks for the good news about the branching progress, as well as the
good preparation of the topic around the installer
Hello Robert,
Am 09.12.22 um 08:55 schrieb Robert Elz:
| - packets from pkgsrc (like samba) will continue to have the
| corresponding options disabled by default
Those packages could have warnings in DESCR and MESSAGE (or whatever it
is called) advising of the need for FFSv2ea
Date:Thu, 8 Dec 2022 20:21:26 +0100
From:Martin Husemann
Message-ID: <20221208192126.gb...@mail.duskware.de>
| Now the question: should the default install really use this new FFS type,
| or should it default to plain FFSv2?
I'd suggest FFSv2, but that's not
Hey folks,
after the EA changes are in current now and all tests look good, we can
finally move on and branch for netbsd-10. Proposed date is next wednsday.
We have quite a few things to finish before the final release, but this
gets things moving - and I hope it will not take more than three
20 matches
Mail list logo
