Re: [pfSense] pfSense 2.3.2-p1 RELEASE Now Available

2016-10-10 Thread Morten Christensen
You should consider to state clearly in such announcements, if the upgrade includes a reboot of the box. Den 06-10-2016 21:29, skrev Jim Thompson: Details are here: https://blog.pfsense.org/?p=2122 ___ --

Re: [pfSense] pfSense 2.3.2-p1 RELEASE Now Available

2016-10-10 Thread Steve Yates
I'm curious if you removed all packages before upgrading? The instructions recommend that. We usually have done so and not had an issue. The packages we've used have a setting to keep settings, for instance Suricata's "Settings will not be removed during package deinstallation" and

Re: [pfSense] pfSense 2.3.2-p1 RELEASE Now Available

2016-10-10 Thread Espen Johansen
They usually do. And with kernel updates you have to. On Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 19:20 Morten Christensen wrote: > You should consider to state clearly in such announcements, if the > upgrade includes a reboot of the box. > > > > Den 06-10-2016 21:29, skrev Jim Thompson: > > Details

Re: [pfSense] pfSense 2.3.2-p1 RELEASE Now Available

2016-10-10 Thread Jim Thompson
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 5:49 AM, Holger Bauer wrote: > > Are there any chances that there is something wrong with the > upgraderepository-servers of pkg.pfsense.org or that some kind of timeout > is too low for connecting to the updaterepository? > I also suspect an issue

Re: [pfSense] pfSense 2.3.2-p1 RELEASE Now Available

2016-10-10 Thread Steven Spencer
Are we the only ones here who are seeing a checksum issue with the download? On 10/10/2016 12:19 PM, Morten Christensen wrote: > You should consider to state clearly in such announcements, if the > upgrade includes a reboot of the box. > > > > Den 06-10-2016 21:29, skrev Jim Thompson: >> Details

Re: [pfSense] pfSense 2.3.2-p1 RELEASE Now Available

2016-10-10 Thread Steven Spencer
Never mind. On further inspection, we were in error. :/ On 10/10/2016 05:37 PM, Steven Spencer wrote: > Are we the only ones here who are seeing a checksum issue with the download? > > On 10/10/2016 12:19 PM, Morten Christensen wrote: >> You should consider to state clearly in such announcements,