From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Mon Apr 11 23:50:45 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5C59B0CD94 for ; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 23:50:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: from be-well.ilk.org (be-well.ilk.org [23.30.133.173]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90FFF127D; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 23:50:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: from lowell-desk.lan (router.lan [172.30.250.2]) by be-well.ilk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED87333C22; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 19:44:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: by lowell-desk.lan (Postfix, from userid 1147) id AE6813981C; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 19:44:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Lowell Gilbert To: Matthew Seaman Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: upgrade to 10.3 from 10.1 References: <1460399864.2173.11.camel@inhio.eu> <570C2819.7070900@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 19:44:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: <570C2819.7070900@FreeBSD.org> (Matthew Seaman's message of "Mon, 11 Apr 2016 23:41:29 +0100") Message-ID: <44k2k3hfrv.fsf@lowell-desk.lan> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 23:50:45 -0000 Matthew Seaman writes: > On 11/04/2016 19:37, asv wrote: >> I don't feel confident to proceed with >> >> # freebsd-update upgrade -r 10.3-RELEASE >> >> from my 10.1-RELEASE-p31. >> I read on the FreeBSD website: "Systems running 9.3-RELEASE,10.3-RC[12] >> can upgrade as follows" but usually releases in the middle are >> included. >> I've tried to search a bit about it but I didn't find much. >> >> Am I just paranoid for not seeing 10.1 and 10.2 in the list? >> Did anybody try this operation already? >> I also have jails there, I want to be very prudent on this machine. > > Other release versions usually aren't listed explicitly, unless there is > something special that needs to be done to upgrade them. The fact that > 10.1 and 10.2 aren't listed is a sign that there's not going to be any > great difficulty upgrading from those versions. > > We haven't seen any horror stories about upgrades on the lists since > 10.3-RELEASE came out. That silence is what should give you confidence: > people just don't talk about things that work routinely. The minute > there's a problem though... I'm thinking there's a problem with setting refentrytitle, as at https://www.freebsd.org/releases/10.3R/installation.html#upgrade-binary