Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 6 Dec 2005 19:50:17 -0500 (EST)
From:      "Allen" <bsdlists@rfnj.org>
To:        "Doug Barton" <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Subject:   Re: Upgrading 5.3 > 6.0 buildworld failure now in libmagic
Message-ID:  <4606.69.116.19.99.1133916617.squirrel@www.rfnj.org>
In-Reply-To: <20051206163732.K60888@znfgre.qbhto.arg>
References:  <200512051518.43896.vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com> <20051206120026.GC62078@ip.net.ua> <200512061148.01012.vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com> <200512061320.45584.vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com> <20051206212850.GA79286@xor.obsecurity.org> <43960445.4050202@jim-liesl.org> <20051206214613.GA79648@xor.obsecurity.org> <43962B8E.1090407@jim-liesl.org> <20051206163732.K60888@znfgre.qbhto.arg>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Tue, December 6, 2005 19:44, Doug Barton wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, secmgr wrote:
>
>> Not to belabour this, but the 6.0 release notes do specificly say 5.3
>> RELEASE
>> and newer.
>
> 5.4-STABLE is newer. :)
>
>> "Source upgrades to FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE are only supported from FreeBSD
>> 5.3-RELEASE or later. Users of older systems wanting to upgrade
>> 6.0-RELEASE
>> will need to update to FreeBSD 5.3 or newer first, then to FreeBSD
>> 6.0-RELEASE."
>
> How does this change to UPDATING in RELENG_6 look to you:
>
> Index: UPDATING
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/UPDATING,v
> retrieving revision 1.416.2.7
> diff -u -r1.416.2.7 UPDATING
> --- UPDATING    1 Nov 2005 23:44:40 -0000       1.416.2.7
> +++ UPDATING    7 Dec 2005 00:42:04 -0000
> @@ -229,7 +229,13 @@
>          page for more details.
>
>          Due to several updates to the build infrastructure, source
> -       upgrades from versions prior to 5.3 no longer supported.
> +       upgrades from versions prior to 5.4-STABLE are not likely
> +       to succeed.

Sorry to butt in but..

Doesn't the definition of -STABLE change, for all intents and purposes, by
the minute?

What next, "versions prior to 5.4-STABLE as of YYYYMMDD ...."?

> +
> +       When upgrading from one major version to another, it is
> +       generally best to upgrade to the latest code in the branch
> +       currently installed first, then do another upgrade to the
> +       new branch.

This is getting closer to the truth.

Why don't you just say "update to the most recent RELENG_5 before
attempting."  Future proof, no room for confusion.








Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4606.69.116.19.99.1133916617.squirrel>