On Sun, 18 Feb 2024 10:57:27 +0100,
Stuart Henderson wrote:
>
> It's not too bad as long as the person building firmware tgz gets a
> heads-up before the version number is updated.
>
Specially that right now it still can be run as:
env VERSION=74 fw_update -p http://firmware.openbsd.org/firmw
On 2024-02-18, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Kirill A. Korinsky wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 17 Feb 2024 22:27:52 +0100,
>> Sonic wrote:
>> >
>> > Seems it's looking for a 7.5 directory (-current apparently just moved
>> > to 7.5-beta) instead of the snapshot directory.
>> >
>>
>> And using snapshot directory
Kirill A. Korinsky wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Feb 2024 22:27:52 +0100,
> Sonic wrote:
> >
> > Seems it's looking for a 7.5 directory (-current apparently just moved
> > to 7.5-beta) instead of the snapshot directory.
> >
>
> And using snapshot directory fails because wrong signature:
>
> ~ $ doas
On Sat, 17 Feb 2024 22:27:52 +0100,
Sonic wrote:
>
> Seems it's looking for a 7.5 directory (-current apparently just moved
> to 7.5-beta) instead of the snapshot directory.
>
And using snapshot directory fails because wrong signature:
~ $ doas fw_update -p http://firmware.openbsd.org/firmwar
Today "sysupgrade -s" failed to fetch updated firmware:
=
Verifying sets.
Fetching updated firmware.
fw_update: failed.
Cannot fetch http://firmware.openbsd.org/firmware/7.5//SHA256.sig (404
Not Found)
Upgrading.
=
Seems it's looking for a 7.5 directory (-cu
> On Dec 14, 2022, at 03:03, Bodie wrote:
>> On 14.12.2022 11:34, Why 42? The lists account. wrote:
>> Right you are, that's the one :-/ I used to be a SPARC kinda guy, but
>> those are all gone now.
>
> OT - they are not, but those prices...
>
> https://shop.eol.systems/servers/serve
On 14.12.2022 11:34, Why 42? The lists account. wrote:
On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 11:11:24PM -0500, Nick Holland wrote:
On 12/12/22 07:22, Why 42? The lists account. wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> Today sysupgrade failed for me, but I'm not sure why? Here's the output:
[ ... ]
There is a problem with
On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 11:12:18AM -, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2022-12-12, Why 42? The lists account. wrote:
> > Today sysupgrade failed for me, but I'm not sure why? Here's the output:
>
> As the various mirrors get updated, this should be coming back to normal now.
Just FYI, It's worki
On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 11:11:24PM -0500, Nick Holland wrote:
> On 12/12/22 07:22, Why 42? The lists account. wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Today sysupgrade failed for me, but I'm not sure why? Here's the output:
> [ ... ]
>
> There is a problem with the distribution network currently. Hopefu
On 2022-12-12, Why 42? The lists account. wrote:
> Today sysupgrade failed for me, but I'm not sure why? Here's the output:
As the various mirrors get updated, this should be coming back to normal now.
On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 8:19 AM Stuart Henderson
wrote:
>
> On 2022-12-12, Amit Kulkarni wrote:
> > retry, and all should be ok.
>
> No, there is a problem with the files.
>
Sorry for that Robb and Stuart.
On 12/12/22 07:22, Why 42? The lists account. wrote:
Hi All,
Today sysupgrade failed for me, but I'm not sure why? Here's the output:
[ ... ]
There is a problem with the distribution network currently. Hopefully
will be resolved soon.
Doing a quick check, looks like only amd64 is broke..bu
On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 07:39:49AM -0600, Amit Kulkarni wrote:
> retry, and all should be ok.
What's the basis of your statement, did something change?
It still fails for me (now @16:15 CET).
I also tried a different mirror, same failure (below).
@Stuart: Although sysupgrade output says that
On 2022-12-12, Amit Kulkarni wrote:
> retry, and all should be ok.
No, there is a problem with the files.
>> I have never really used signify before, but this command from the man
>> page also generates an error:
>> > mjoelnir:_sysupgrade 12.12 13:03:30 # signify -C -p
>> > /etc/signify/openbsd
retry, and all should be ok.
On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 7:18 AM Why 42? The lists account.
wrote:
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> Today sysupgrade failed for me, but I'm not sure why? Here's the output:
> > # sysupgrade -s -n
> > Fetching from http://ftp.fau.de/pub/OpenBSD/snapshots/amd64/
> > SHA256.sig 100%
Hi All,
Today sysupgrade failed for me, but I'm not sure why? Here's the output:
> # sysupgrade -s -n
> Fetching from http://ftp.fau.de/pub/OpenBSD/snapshots/amd64/
> SHA256.sig 100%
> |**
Hi All,
I seem to have a sysupgrade problem ...
sysupgrade fails after reboot with an error:
The directory '/home/_sysupgrade/' does not exist.
Sometime ago I had a similar issue due to my having "/home" as a
sub-directory of a filesystem "/space". My mistake app
> 7 апр. 2022 г., в 17:13, Jan Stary написал(а):
>
>
>>
>> It seems that problem is not having any display device during sysupgrade
>> process.
>
> I don't think sysupgrade has any requirements regarding a display device:
> headless machines get sysupgraded regularly
Yes. I have some anoth
> It seems that problem is not having any display device during sysupgrade
> process.
I don't think sysupgrade has any requirements regarding a display device:
headless machines get sysupgraded regularly
19.10.2021 10:14, kasak пишет:
18.10.2021 23:18, kasak пишет:
Hello everyone!
I have one mini router, made from gigabyte GB-SBCAP4200 barebone
It has nothing special. Just base openbsd, without any additional
packages and modifications.
for some reason, sysupgrade does not upgrade this s
On 2021-10-19 02:45, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 11:18:20PM +0300, kasak wrote:
Hello everyone!
I have one mini router, made from gigabyte GB-SBCAP4200 barebone
It has nothing special. Just base openbsd, without any additional
packages
and modifications.
for some reason, s
18.10.2021 23:18, kasak пишет:
Hello everyone!
I have one mini router, made from gigabyte GB-SBCAP4200 barebone
It has nothing special. Just base openbsd, without any additional
packages and modifications.
for some reason, sysupgrade does not upgrade this system.
It successfully boot new k
19.10.2021 09:41, Otto Moerbeek пишет:
On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 09:30:47AM +0300, kasak wrote:
19.10.2021 08:45, Otto Moerbeek пишет:
On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 11:18:20PM +0300, kasak wrote:
Hello everyone!
I have one mini router, made from gigabyte GB-SBCAP4200 barebone
It has nothing spec
On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 09:30:47AM +0300, kasak wrote:
>
> 19.10.2021 08:45, Otto Moerbeek пишет:
> > On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 11:18:20PM +0300, kasak wrote:
> >
> > > Hello everyone!
> > >
> > > I have one mini router, made from gigabyte GB-SBCAP4200 barebone
> > >
> > > It has nothing special
19.10.2021 08:45, Otto Moerbeek пишет:
On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 11:18:20PM +0300, kasak wrote:
Hello everyone!
I have one mini router, made from gigabyte GB-SBCAP4200 barebone
It has nothing special. Just base openbsd, without any additional packages
and modifications.
for some reason, sysu
On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 11:18:20PM +0300, kasak wrote:
> Hello everyone!
>
> I have one mini router, made from gigabyte GB-SBCAP4200 barebone
>
> It has nothing special. Just base openbsd, without any additional packages
> and modifications.
>
> for some reason, sysupgrade does not upgrade this
Hello everyone!
I have one mini router, made from gigabyte GB-SBCAP4200 barebone
It has nothing special. Just base openbsd, without any additional
packages and modifications.
for some reason, sysupgrade does not upgrade this system.
It successfully boot new kernel, but do not process the upgr
Bingo! You are right on, as /home is an nfs mount. Unmounting it
allows sysupgrade to work.
Thanks!
Dave Raymond
On 6/17/20, Florian Obser wrote:
> Wild guess, /home is an nfs mount or mounted read-only? That's not going to
> work unfortunately.
>
>
> On 17 June 2020 22:23:13 CEST, "Raymond,
Wild guess, /home is an nfs mount or mounted read-only? That's not going to
work unfortunately.
On 17 June 2020 22:23:13 CEST, "Raymond, David" wrote:
>I am trying to upgrade a bunch of machines from 6.6 to 6.7 using
>sysupgrade and I get the message
>
>/usr/sbin/sysupgrade[136]: cannot create
I am trying to upgrade a bunch of machines from 6.6 to 6.7 using
sysupgrade and I get the message
/usr/sbin/sysupgrade[136]: cannot create SHA256.sig: Permission denied
These are AMD64 machines on wired internet at my university.
Sysupgrade worked fine on a laptop and on an AMD desktop using my h
On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 1:30 PM Christer Solskogen <
christer.solsko...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 12:27 PM Stuart Henderson
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Are you able to ^Z at that point and run "mount"? (I can't remember if
>> sysupgrade lets you do this).
>>
>>
> I can. My root disk is no
On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 12:27 PM Stuart Henderson
wrote:
>
> Are you able to ^Z at that point and run "mount"? (I can't remember if
> sysupgrade lets you do this).
>
>
I can. My root disk is not mounted.
Can you show your /etc/fstab?
>
89100ad7b8b8d77a.b none swap sw
89100ad7b8b8d77a.a / ffs rw
On 2020-01-05, Christer Solskogen wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On one(out of two!) of my APUs sysupgrade fails, and I'm having trouble
> understanding why.
> This is what happens:
>
> Available disks are: sd0.
> Which disk is the root disk? ('?' for details) [sd0] s
On Sun, Jan 5, 2020 at 1:11 PM Anders Andersson wrote:
>
>
> Not sure if it's in any way related when it comes to doing a
> sysupgrade compared to a clean install, but did you see this thread
> and the corresponding BIOS upgrade?
>
> http://openbsd-archive.7691.n7.nabble.com/APU2-fails-to-boot-on
f
> December)
>
> On Sun, Jan 5, 2020 at 12:58 PM Christer Solskogen <
> christer.solsko...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > On one(out of two!) of my APUs sysupgrade fails, and I'm having trouble
> > understanding why.
> > This is what happen
sko...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On one(out of two!) of my APUs sysupgrade fails, and I'm having trouble
> understanding why.
> This is what happens:
>
> Available disks are: sd0.
> Which disk is the root disk? ('?' for details) [sd0] sd0
> Che
Hi!
On one(out of two!) of my APUs sysupgrade fails, and I'm having trouble
understanding why.
This is what happens:
Available disks are: sd0.
Which disk is the root disk? ('?' for details) [sd0] sd0
Checking root filesystem (fsck -fp /dev/sd0a)... OK.
Mounting root filesystem (m
37 matches
Mail list logo
