From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Fri Mar 16 09:45:02 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 223D2F5FC4A for ; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 09:45:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 482254ac@razorfever.net) Received: from pmta31.teksavvy.com (pmta31.teksavvy.com [76.10.157.38]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "*.teksavvy.com", Issuer "DigiCert SHA2 High Assurance Server CA" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AECF975CE6 for ; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 09:45:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 482254ac@razorfever.net) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A2EzDABokata/0StpUVeGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQcBAQEBAYIZgTcrPG4og12LDI0FAUcFAYEwBTIBY5YNCoUQAoMzIjgUAQI?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAQECA2gohScBBSMPAQUeMwsYAgImAgI5HhMGAgEBhQcNsAuCJoRug3eCC?= =?us-ascii?q?hN5hCKDIIJEgniFUoI8gmEDhzSGI4pRCAECjyWBVIY8EIUTh0GIYwyBKjUigVI?= =?us-ascii?q?fXIMHkQkkNI8vAQEB?= X-IPAS-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A2EzDABokata/0StpUVeGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQcBAQEBAYI?= =?us-ascii?q?ZgTcrPG4og12LDI0FAUcFAYEwBTIBY5YNCoUQAoMzIjgUAQIBAQEBAQECA2goh?= =?us-ascii?q?ScBBSMPAQUeMwsYAgImAgI5HhMGAgEBhQcNsAuCJoRug3eCChN5hCKDIIJEgni?= =?us-ascii?q?FUoI8gmEDhzSGI4pRCAECjyWBVIY8EIUTh0GIYwyBKjUigVIfXIMHkQkkNI8vA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEB?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.48,315,1517893200"; d="scan'208";a="22771400" Received: from 69-165-173-68.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO mail.razorfever.net) ([69.165.173.68]) by smtp.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Mar 2018 05:44:55 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (mail.razorfever.net [192.168.0.4]) by mail.razorfever.net (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTP id w2G9isKS028477 for ; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 05:44:54 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from 482254ac@razorfever.net) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.razorfever.net: Host mail.razorfever.net [192.168.0.4] claimed to be [127.0.0.1] Subject: Re: freebsd-update: holding back patches, or to a specific version To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <50c78b4c-2832-acb2-4810-13f45794870c@razorfever.net> <44in9xf2ir.fsf@lowell-desk.lan> <391ff7b9-c340-3286-158b-20c7a2022bd0@chezmarcotte.ca> From: "Derek (freebsd lists)" <482254ac@razorfever.net> Message-ID: <60d4bfc4-0cd5-74b0-41e9-bfab22d66e6d@razorfever.net> Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 05:44:54 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <391ff7b9-c340-3286-158b-20c7a2022bd0@chezmarcotte.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED, FROM_STARTS_WITH_NUMS,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.4.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on mail.razorfever.net X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 09:45:02 -0000 On 18-03-16 05:20 AM, Derek wrote: > On 18-03-15 05:32 PM, Lowell Gilbert wrote: >> "Derek (freebsd lists)" <482254ac@razorfever.net> writes: >> >>> Was wondering if anyone knows a way to *not* update to the latest >>> patch level, but a specific patch level with freebsd-update? >> >> Maybe I'm missing your real question, but isn't that just the >> '-r' option? >> > > Thanks!  Nope -r should be it, but I don't think you can specify > patch level.  If I do: > >   freebsd-update -r 11.1-RELEASE-p7 upgrade > > I get: > >   Fetching metadata signature for 11.1-RELEASE-p7 from > update6.freebsd.org... failed. > > I'm trying with just: > >   freebsd-update -r 11.1-RELEASE upgrade > > to see where I get, but I suspect I'll be at 11.1-RELEASE-p8 at > the end of it.  (I don't want -p8 right this second). > > I'll send an update when I see how it goes... > Yup - freebsd-update -r 11.1-RELEASE upgrade will take me to -p8, but I *definitely* want -p7, until I can adequately assess the impact of -p8 (and maybe let it bake for a bit). Any other thoughts out there? Thanks Derek