From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 27 17:38:53 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE4AA106566B for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 17:38:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-questions@m.gmane.org) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37D658FC12 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 17:38:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QF8hP-0007DK-Oe for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 19:38:51 +0200 Received: from pool-173-79-85-36.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([173.79.85.36]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 19:38:51 +0200 Received: from nightrecon by pool-173-79-85-36.washdc.fios.verizon.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 19:38:51 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org From: Michael Powell Followup-To: gmane.os.freebsd.questions Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 13:41:16 -0400 Lines: 77 Message-ID: References: <20110427133845.61347e05@adolfputzen> <20110427143904.GB29722@gizmo.acns.msu.edu> <20110427173550.1aa40f37@adolfputzen> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: pool-173-79-85-36.washdc.fios.verizon.net Subject: Re: hello X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 17:38:53 -0000 Julian Fagir wrote: [snip] > >> But, the question is quite clear, though I have no idea why [s]he >> wants to do that downgrade and might want to explore that before >> encouraging that move. > That was what I was looking for, and for what was already done and how the > system is usually updated (binary, sources) or if it was ever updated, and > what the system does, i.e. which software is installed. > And even why it shall be 7.2 or 7.1 and nothing newer. > > > Regards, Julian Language difficulties are problematic by themselves, but most professionals are not concerned with this as long as the information is there with which to address the actual problem. There are several methods for upgrading systems and they essentially break down into two categories - binary or source. I am fairly unfamiliar with the binary approaches as I have always used the source-based method. I believe one caveat with the binary method is it only works with the GENERIC (the original kernel from the base install) kernel, so if you desire to run custom kernels the source upgrade process may be a better way to go. The main point to be aware of is the ABI changes (and potential breakages) which occur when changing major version numbers, e.g., for example when going from 7.x version to 8.x version. When doing a source based upgrade (also known as "the make buildworld kernel installxxx..." dance) from one major version to the next you will need to rebuild all installed ports immediately after (and indeed as part of) so that they will then be linked against the new major versions' libraries. Mostly this process is driven by the need to upgrade, and there are actually compatibility shims which allow for running a previous version of an application (let's say an app limited to run only on 6.x or 7.x) on the newer operating system version. An example would be to install the /usrports/misc/compat7x port on an 8.x machine in order to support an app designed for 7.x. Although this is only an example for illustrative purposes, it also may _not_ be applicable in your situation as it provides compatibility shims for 7.3. So there are any number of available avenues open for you to choose from, and some reading on the upgrade procedures covered in the Handbook might be a good way to become more familiar in order to make a more informed decision on exactly which may be the best for your specific situation. In addition to all the other upgrade methodologies which might actually allow for you to do an actual "downgrade" successfully, you may also wish to consider starting from scratch. I would tend to proceed in this direction if I was taking over a mess someone else had created. Many times a fresh OS can be installed, the application installed, and the previous configuration files and data can simply be copied to the new install. This way you know everything about the machine you are now responsible for as opposed to never knowing for sure everything your predecessor may have screwed up. First thing I do is study the situation and not make any changes to anything until I've figured out exactly what I need to do. Backups of all data is essential; I always dump everything so I can always recover back to a known good if something goes terribly wrong. First and foremost question I have is concerning the statement: "And even why it shall be 7.2 or 7.1 and nothing newer. " We really need to understand this completely first. More details on this may be useful for potentially providing better advice. -Mike PS: I don't like any app which absolutely says it 'requires' a version of an operating system which may not receive security updates and whose End-of- Life may expire before I need to stop relying on this application. Whenever I've seen this in the past it has most often been associated with bad and defective coding by whoever wrote the app, and nursing it along only pushed off into the future actually dealing with the problem of a broken app.