On 19/02/2012 02:06, Antonio Olivares wrote:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Robert Bonomi bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com
wrote:
Antonio,
The 'upgrade' from _P5_ to P6 did not touch the kernel, hence the kernel ID
did not change.
Going from P3 you should have seen a kernel update.
what
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 4:22 AM, Matthew Seaman
m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk wrote:
On 19/02/2012 02:06, Antonio Olivares wrote:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Robert Bonomi bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com
wrote:
Antonio,
The 'upgrade' from _P5_ to P6 did not touch the kernel, hence the
Hi,
On Sunday 19 February 2012 18:17:59 Antonio Olivares wrote:
I hope this is the case, but that -p3 makes me think? I am hesistant
to move to 9.0-RELEASE as of yet. There will apparently be an
8.3-RELEASE and I am not sure whether I have to rebuild all ports if I
you could adapt my
On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 10:22:57 +
Matthew Seaman wrote:
Four possibilities, roughly in order of severity:
1) None of the security patches between p3 and p6 did actually
touch the kernel. You can tell if this was the case by looking
at the list of modified files in the
RW skrev 2012-02-19 13:59:
On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 10:22:57 +
Matthew Seaman wrote:
Four possibilities, roughly in order of severity:
1) None of the security patches between p3 and p6 did actually
touch the kernel. You can tell if this was the case by looking
at the list
On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 14:11:09 +0100
Leslie Jensen wrote:
I don't know if it's the solution to your question but I asked the
same a while back and the answer I got was that I had to recompile
and install the kernel then you'll have p6 :-)
The only thing you gain by that is that uname
On 19/02/2012 11:17, Antonio Olivares wrote:
I hope this is the case, but that -p3 makes me think? I am hesistant
to move to 9.0-RELEASE as of yet. There will apparently be an
8.3-RELEASE and I am not sure whether I have to rebuild all ports if I
update to newer release. I have read some
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 05:17:59AM -0600, Antonio Olivares wrote:
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 4:22 AM, Matthew Seaman
m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk wrote:
Here is the thing I alluded to under option (1). The security patch for
the unix domain socket problem came out in two chunks. There was
On 19/02/2012 17:49, Nikola Pavlović wrote:
If it will feel you more confident that everything is OK, I too have -p3
reported from the kernel, but -p6 in newvers.sh. I remember a
discussion shortly after FreeBSD-SA-11:05-unix (maybe on
freebsd-security@ but I'm not sure) about this confusion
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 06:00:50PM +, Matthew Seaman wrote:
On 19/02/2012 17:49, Nikola Pavlović wrote:
If it will feel you more confident that everything is OK, I too have -p3
reported from the kernel, but -p6 in newvers.sh. I remember a
discussion shortly after FreeBSD-SA-11:05-unix
Dear kind folks,
I am getting more and more as to what is needed to keeping a system
running in optimum conditions(updating ports userland too). I was
just updating ports, but neglecting the new userland tools kernels.
I have successfully run make buildworld make installworld, and the
steps
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Robert Bonomi bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com wrote:
Antonio,
The 'upgrade' from _P5_ to P6 did not touch the kernel, hence the kernel ID
did not change.
Going from P3 you should have seen a kernel update.
what do you see if you do strings /boot/kernel/kernel
12 matches
Mail list logo
