Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 20:34:31 -0700 From: "Brian O'Shea" <boshea@ricochet.net> To: "stop here. start everywhere." <feedback@phpStop.com> Cc: Sergey Babkin <babkin@bellatlantic.net>, Frederik Meerwaldt <frederik@freddym.org>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. Linux Message-ID: <20001022203431.T622@beastie.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <39F3902A.6846BB49@phpStop.com>; from stop here. start everywhere. on Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 03:11:06AM %2B0200 References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0010212333001.18742-100000@server.wes.mee.com> <39F3609E.83C02B3E@bellatlantic.net> <39F38893.6A8204A@bellatlantic.net> <39F3902A.6846BB49@phpStop.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 03:11:06AM +0200, stop here. start everywhere. wrote: > Hi all again, > > Speaking of this subject again, I have read in the archives that FreeBSD > has a method of building the whole source tree using the "make world" > command. Although this is a nice feature, but isn't too much risky to > upgrade the whole system in one shot? Actually, FreeBSD has broken it down into four steps now: make buildworld make buildkernel make installkernel make installworld It is crucial that you know what you are doing before you attempt this! It generally isn't necessary to build the world when you are running a release version of FreeBSD, and if you are just configuring a custom kernel (i.e. not upgrading it), then you should use the normal method of compiling a kernel (see the handbook section on this topic at http://www.freebsd.org/handbook/kernelconfig.html). The buildworld/ buildkernel/installkernel/installworld procedures are really for upgrading your system from sources, and if you are going to attempt to do this, you *must* read the UPDATING file in your source directory (typically in /usr/src) for special instructions that might be needed for the particular version transition that you will be making. You should also be subscribed to the mailing list that discusses the version to which you will be upgrading for a good week before you attempt the upgrade. > > What if something breaks down after you've recompiled? Your system would > be dead. In Linux, on the contrary, there's no such feature and you'll > need to take the server anyways to upgrade it, which seems as a good way > of doing things. In the meantime, another backup server can take its > position. I guess in this fashion, Linux is better than FreeBSD... or > did I miss something here? As with any upgrade (on Linux as well), you run the risk of running into any bugs that may exist in the new version. If the problem is with the kernel, you can back out by booting the old kernel. It's a good idea to keep around a copy of a known good kernel just for this reason. There are three branches of FreeBSD, the release branch, the stable branch, and the current branch. There are different reasons for running each, and as I mentioned before, there is a mailing list for stable and current, and you should be subscribed to it if you are going to be running anything other than release. Cheers, -brian > > /John > > > Sergey Babkin wrote: > > > > By the way, speaking of that, things in FreeBSD tend to be more > > synchronous with docs than in Linux. Also FreeBSD has much better > > backwards compatibility (though alas still not as good as commercial > > systems). In Linux the applications tend to break and require > > recompilation when the kernel is upgraded to the next > > second-digit version. > > > > -SB > > -- > Regards, > > phpStop.com http://www.phpstop.com/ > stop here. start everywhere. mailto:info@phpstop.com > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message -- Brian O'Shea boshea@ricochet.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001022203431.T622>