Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2014 10:32:04 -0800 From: Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com> To: "Michael B. Eichorn" <ike@michaeleichorn.com> Cc: FreeBSD-STABLE Mailing List <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: wrong patchlevel after freebsd-update install? Message-ID: <CAN6yY1u-Qdt7n5pTghRLApsUQDD92TH87TygAeNc7qmQu8HKHQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1418474921.2156.20.camel@michaeleichorn.com> References: <201412120930.sBC9UUEF041702@mech-as221.men.bris.ac.uk> <7B7C7B31-B89F-4770-8DA1-CE7D0BD513EB@gromit.dlib.vt.edu> <1418474921.2156.20.camel@michaeleichorn.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 4:48 AM, Michael B. Eichorn <ike@michaeleichorn.com> wrote: > On Fri, 2014-12-12 at 10:23 -0500, Paul Mather wrote: > > On Dec 12, 2014, at 4:30 AM, Anton Shterenlikht <mexas@bris.ac.uk> > wrote: > > > > > On 10.0-RELEASE-p12 amd64 I updated to p13 as: > > > > > > freebsd-update fetch > > > freebsd-update install > > > reboot > > > > > > However, uname still shows the old patchlevel: > > > > > > # uname -a > > > FreeBSD 001cc0f01814.anet.bris.ac.uk 10.0-RELEASE-p12 FreeBSD > 10.0-RELEASE-p12 #0: Tue Nov 4 05:07:17 UTC 2014 > root@amd64-builder.daemonology.net:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 > > > # > > > > > > But freebsd-update fetch suggests I'm already at p13: > > > > > > # freebsd-update fetch > > > Looking up update.FreeBSD.org mirrors... 5 mirrors found. > > > Fetching metadata signature for 10.0-RELEASE from > update5.freebsd.org... done. > > > Fetching metadata index... done. > > > Inspecting system... done. > > > Preparing to download files... done. > > > > > > No updates needed to update system to 10.0-RELEASE-p13. > > > # > > > > > > So has the update p12 -> p13 succeeded? > > > > What does "freebsd-version" report? If it returns 10.0-RELEASE-p13 then > your freebsd-update succeeded. > > > > > Please clarify > > > > It's my understanding that uname only gets updated when freebsd-update > updates the kernel. I think that's why freebsd-version was introduced. > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > Anton > > > > Cheers, > > > > Paul. > > > > > > I have similar question about the 10.1-RELEASE-p1 update > > I ran the update as: > # freebsd-update fetch > # freebsd-update install > # ezjail-admin update -u > # reboot > > Yet when I run: > # freebsd-version -ku > 10.1-RELEASE > 10.1-RELEASE-p1 > > # uname -a > FreeBSD terra.michaeleichorn.com 10.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE #0 > r274401: Tue Nov 11 21:02:49 UTC 2014 > root@releng1.nyi.freebsd.org:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 > > Do I have a problem here or is this the expected behavior? > > I thought that 'freebsd-version -k' would report the new patchlevel even > if there was not a kernel update. > > For the record 'freebsd-update fetch' and 'freebsd-update install' > report no updates to install. > > Regards, > > Ike > This is normal and expected. FreeBSD, when built from sources as was always done before freebsd-update(8) came long, always built the kernel (buildkernel) and non-kernel or "user land" (buildworld) from one set of sources and, as a result, the kernel version as reported by uname(1) was all that was normally used. Along came binary updates (freebsd-update) andit became perfectly normal to install an update that only patched the kernel or the user space. As a result, security patches often resulted in updates that uname(1) did not change because the kernel was not updated. des@ created freebsd-version about a year ago to deal with this. The 10.0-p1 update was such a case where the kernel was not updated, so uname still reports the version as 10.1-RELEASE. For more information on this, see the freebsd-version man page. It goes into this in far more detail. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired E-mail: rkoberman@gmail.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAN6yY1u-Qdt7n5pTghRLApsUQDD92TH87TygAeNc7qmQu8HKHQ>