From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 23 06:06:50 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86DC616A40F for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2006 06:06:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from andrew@areilly.bpa.nu) Received: from omta05ps.mx.bigpond.com (omta05ps.mx.bigpond.com [144.140.83.195]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC3A943D46 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2006 06:06:43 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from andrew@areilly.bpa.nu) Received: from areilly.bpa.nu ([141.168.2.3]) by omta05ps.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <20061023060641.JZSK22583.omta05ps.mx.bigpond.com@areilly.bpa.nu> for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2006 06:06:41 +0000 Received: (qmail 4134 invoked by uid 501); 23 Oct 2006 06:04:31 -0000 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 16:04:31 +1000 From: Andrew Reilly To: Robert Watson Message-ID: <20061023060431.GA3186@duncan.reilly.home> References: <17719.43574.819134.370333@roam.psg.com> <20061020005501.R32598@fledge.watson.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20061020005501.R32598@fledge.watson.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Cc: Randy Bush , FreeBSD Stable Subject: Re: 5 to 6 X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 06:06:50 -0000 On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 12:56:58AM +0100, Robert Watson wrote: > On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, Randy Bush wrote: > >do folk actually successfully upgrade > >to RELENG_6 *safely* on a many-user production system using the > >instructions in UPDATING? I've done that successfully on two single-user workstations, but it failed when it came to try on the one multi-user production box that I maintain. I've posted to the lists about this a couple of times and received zero responses, so my guess is that my condition was sufficiently obscure that no-one else has experienced the problem[*]. A shame. I'll have to do a re-format and start from scratch upgrade, some time that I can get the system quiet enough for long enough. > Do make sure to boot a 6.x kernel with your 5.x userland and test things > out a bit - make sure your hardware probes, is reliable, etc. Ditto. This was how I discovered that the ataraid in the 6.x kernel does something sufficiently different to the one in the 5.x kernel that I couldn't get past the fsck of the /usr partition... Luckily enough of / was mounting successfully for me to back out to the (working) 5.x kernel. So: my two cents: it can work, but it's possible for it not to work, and care is required. [*] The production server is using a software RAID mirror on a pair of SATA drives on a low-end Intel P4/ICH6 motherboard, using ar(4), configured by atacontrol. Fsck on 6.x can't find any superblocks on /usr, but 5.5 is fine. Cheers, -- Andrew