Re: Updating 5.2.1 Release #

2004-07-29 Thread Scott
( Scott, I'm sorry the correct tag is ( ( *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_5_2 That's ok Ezequiel. No harm done. Fortunately I was upgrading a fresh install so none of my own data was lost. I've learned a lot today. I've put off upgrading because the entire process looked so daunting, bu

Re: Updating 5.2.1 Release #

2004-07-29 Thread Ezequiel
Scott, I'm sorry the correct tag is *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_5_2 - Original Message - From: "Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Ezequiel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 1:01 PM Subject: Re: Updating 5.

Re: Updating 5.2.1 Release #

2004-07-29 Thread Puna Tannehill
Matthew Seaman wrote: On Thu, Jul 29, 2004 at 09:37:35AM -0500, Puna Tannehill wrote: Scott wrote: uname -a shows: FreeBSD 5.2.1-Release #0: I was expecting the release (version, revision# ?) number to be greater than #0. I think I've seen where the latest revision is #9 or so? Do I need to tell

Re: Updating 5.2.1 Release #

2004-07-29 Thread Scott
( No -- that's correct in spirit, but wrong ( in detail. Use tag=RELENG_5_2 for best ( results. Ah, that would be what I did wrong then. I've reinstalled, am currently installing cvsup from ports and when that is done I'll try to update again with the correct tag this time. Thanks ag

Re: Updating 5.2.1 Release #

2004-07-29 Thread Donald J. O'Neill
> So if I set my cvs tag as Ezequiel (thank you) suggested: > change: *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_5_2_1_RELEASE > to: *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_5_2_1 > That will get me the latest patches? > > I'll make that change and rebuild again today. > > Thanks all for your help. :) > Scott > > ___

Re: Updating 5.2.1 Release #

2004-07-29 Thread Matthew Seaman
On Thu, Jul 29, 2004 at 10:05:49AM -0500, Scott wrote: > So if I set my cvs tag as Ezequiel (thank you) suggested: > change: *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_5_2_1_RELEASE > to: *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_5_2_1 > That will get me the latest patches? No -- that's correct in spirit, but wrong

Re: Updating 5.2.1 Release #

2004-07-29 Thread Matthew Seaman
On Thu, Jul 29, 2004 at 11:01:34AM -0500, Scott wrote: > Ok, I just did as suggested: > > ( Change this: > ( *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_5_2_1_RELEASE > ( > ( for this > ( *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_5_2_1 > > and ran cvsup again. > > This time, I successfully and quick

Re: Updating 5.2.1 Release #

2004-07-29 Thread Matthew Seaman
On Thu, Jul 29, 2004 at 05:51:57PM +0200, Cedric GROSS wrote: > So what is the diff between uname -r and uname -v, which produce for me > : > > Uname -r : 5.2.1-RELEASE > Uname -v : FreeBSD 5.2.1-RELEASE #0: Mon Jun 14 14:52:08 CEST 2004 > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/CNV_TOTAL > > Ext

Re: Updating 5.2.1 Release #

2004-07-29 Thread Scott
Ok, I just did as suggested: ( Change this: ( *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_5_2_1_RELEASE ( ( for this ( *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_5_2_1 and ran cvsup again. This time, I successfully and quickly deleted every thing under /usr/src. There must be something wrong with my

RE: Updating 5.2.1 Release #

2004-07-29 Thread Cedric GROSS
> Matthew Seaman > On Thu, Jul 29, 2004 at 09:37:35AM -0500, Puna Tannehill wrote: > > Scott wrote: > > > >uname -a shows: > > >FreeBSD 5.2.1-Release #0: > > > > > >I was expecting the release (version, revision# ?) number to > > >be greater than #0. I think I've seen where the latest > > >re

Re: Updating 5.2.1 Release #

2004-07-29 Thread Scott
  (   What the original poster was thinking of is   (   the patchlevel that gets incremented every   (   time a new security (or nowadays: errata)   (   patch is applied to any of the -RELEASE   (   branches.  That modifies the OS name (ie.   (   the output of 'uname -r') That is exactly right Ma

Re: Updating 5.2.1 Release #

2004-07-29 Thread Matthew Seaman
On Thu, Jul 29, 2004 at 09:37:35AM -0500, Puna Tannehill wrote: > Scott wrote: > >uname -a shows: > >FreeBSD 5.2.1-Release #0: > > > >I was expecting the release (version, revision# ?) number to > >be greater than #0. I think I've seen where the latest > >revision is #9 or so? Do I need to tell

Re: Updating 5.2.1 Release #

2004-07-29 Thread Puna Tannehill
Scott wrote: Hi, I completed my first update (upgrade?) of a 5.2.1 fresh FreeBSD install. I followed a couple how-to's, the handbook, and "Absolute BSD" as my guides. My machine is a 1.8Ghz AMD. Here is my supfile: *default host=cvsup15.us.FreeBSD.org *default base=/usr *default prefix=/usr *def

Re: Updating 5.2.1 Release #

2004-07-29 Thread Ezequiel
sday, July 29, 2004 11:05 AM Subject: Updating 5.2.1 Release # Hi, I completed my first update (upgrade?) of a 5.2.1 fresh FreeBSD install. I followed a couple how-to's, the handbook, and "Absolute BSD" as my guides. My machine is a 1.8Ghz AMD. Here is my supfile: *default host

Updating 5.2.1 Release #

2004-07-29 Thread Scott
Hi, I completed my first update (upgrade?) of a 5.2.1 fresh FreeBSD install. I followed a couple how-to's, the handbook, and "Absolute BSD" as my guides. My machine is a 1.8Ghz AMD. Here is my supfile: *default host=cvsup15.us.FreeBSD.org *default base=/usr *default prefix=/usr *default release=