Re: FreeBSD 9.0-BETA2 or 3?
I looked at ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/releases/ and found a BETA3 but only for some platforms not including i386 and amd64, but that was yesterday. I looked later during the day and found the BETA3 for i386 and amd64. Now the question is how to update without trashing the BETA2 installation with all the applications build from ports. I don't want to rebuild everything from ports every time there is a new beta or release candidate; that would be a very inefficient use of time. If I can't update with the installer, can I update from source? Would the best way be to download only the source (src.txz), then rm -rf /usr/src/* then extract the new source? Otherwise I don't know what to cvsup to, and I did read the FreeBSD Handbook. I also read /usr/src/README and UPDATING. I don't want to update source to HEAD which might now be 10.0-CURRENT. Tom ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: FreeBSD 9.0-BETA2 or 3?
2011/9/28 Thomas Mueller mueller6...@bellsouth.net: I looked at ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/releases/ and found a BETA3 but only for some platforms not including i386 and amd64, but that was yesterday. I looked later during the day and found the BETA3 for i386 and amd64. Now the question is how to update without trashing the BETA2 installation with all the applications build from ports. I don't want to rebuild everything from ports every time there is a new beta or release candidate; that would be a very inefficient use of time. If I can't update with the installer, can I update from source? I'm only used to source-updating, but maybe you can update from one BETA to another with freebsd-update ? Would the best way be to download only the source (src.txz), then rm -rf /usr/src/* then extract the new source? If you want to go the source way, you can use csup from the base system. Otherwise I don't know what to cvsup to, and I did read the FreeBSD Handbook. I also read /usr/src/README and UPDATING. I don't want to update source to HEAD which might now be 10.0-CURRENT. I personally use subversion-freebsd (from ports) to update my sources because I have local patches, and I switched to the http://svn.freebsd.org/base/stable/9/ branch. csup is simpler to use for common tasks, see /usr/share/examples/cvsup/stable-supfile. Cheers Tom ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- Olivier Smedts _ ASCII ribbon campaign ( ) e-mail: oliv...@gid0.org - against HTML email vCards X www: http://www.gid0.org - against proprietary attachments / \ Il y a seulement 10 sortes de gens dans le monde : ceux qui comprennent le binaire, et ceux qui ne le comprennent pas. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: FreeBSD 9.0-BETA2 or 3?
On 28/09/2011 10:28, Thomas Mueller wrote: I looked at ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/releases/ and found a BETA3 but only for some platforms not including i386 and amd64, but that was yesterday. I looked later during the day and found the BETA3 for i386 and amd64. Yup. The stable/9 branch was created a few days ago in SVN, and correspondingly the RELENG_9 cvs branch. It's taking a little while for all that and various related changes to percolate through the system. Now the question is how to update without trashing the BETA2 installation with all the applications build from ports. BETA2 to BETA3 should not require reinstalling any ports. All the pain of updating ABI version numbers for 9.x has already happened, so anything that ran under BETA2 should just work under BETA3. I don't want to rebuild everything from ports every time there is a new beta or release candidate; that would be a very inefficient use of time. Yes. That would be silly. And a waste of time and energy. If I can't update with the installer, can I update from source? This is FreeBSD. Of course you can use the source. Would the best way be to download only the source (src.txz), then rm -rf /usr/src/* then extract the new source? Otherwise I don't know what to cvsup to, and I did read the FreeBSD Handbook. I also read /usr/src/README and UPDATING. I don't want to update source to HEAD which might now be 10.0-CURRENT. For cvsup / csup, you need to change your supfile to use the RELENG_9 tag. Something like this: *default host=CHANGE_THIS.FreeBSD.org *default base=/var/db *default prefix=/usr *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_9 *default delete use-rel-suffix *default compress src-all Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate JID: matt...@infracaninophile.co.uk Kent, CT11 9PW signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: FreeBSD 9.0-BETA2 or 3?
Hi, On 9/28/11 5:28 AM, Thomas Mueller wrote: I looked at ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/releases/ and found a BETA3 but only for some platforms not including i386 and amd64, but that was yesterday. I looked later during the day and found the BETA3 for i386 and amd64. I've been (trying to) update the download URLs as the new images are uploaded to prevent broken links, though -BETA3 is not officially announced yet. Sorry if this causes confusion, but the alternative would be more confusion to why links are broken. Now the question is how to update without trashing the BETA2 installation with all the applications build from ports. I don't want to rebuild everything from ports every time there is a new beta or release candidate; that would be a very inefficient use of time. If I can't update with the installer, can I update from source? Would the best way be to download only the source (src.txz), then rm -rf /usr/src/* then extract the new source? Otherwise I don't know what to cvsup to, and I did read the FreeBSD Handbook. I also read /usr/src/README and UPDATING. I don't want to update source to HEAD which might now be 10.0-CURRENT. If you use svn for your source tree, you can use 'svn switch': 'svn switch svn://svn.freebsd.org/base/stable/9 /usr/src' If you use c(v)sup, change the tag in your supfile. Regards, Glen -- Glen Barber ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
FreeBSD 9.0-BETA2 or 3?
I see a thread, FreeBSD 9-Beta3 on X300 problems. and now am curious about what is the current beta? I looked at ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/releases/ and found a BETA3 but only for some platforms not including i386 and amd64. Maybe the burncd problem, not working on SATA, is a temporary barrier? Not to sound impatient, I'd rather wait for something good than something released prematurely. Tom ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: FreeBSD 9.0-BETA2 or 3?
On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 09:06:53 + (GMT), Thomas Mueller wrote: I see a thread, FreeBSD 9-Beta3 on X300 problems. and now am curious about what is the current beta? I looked at ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/releases/ and found a BETA3 but only for some platforms not including i386 and amd64. Maybe the burncd problem, not working on SATA, is a temporary barrier? Not to sound impatient, I'd rather wait for something good than something released prematurely. BETA3 is uploaded to all mirrors ATM, so expect an announcement about its availability, soon. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
