Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 13:02:29 -0400 From: Peter Radcliffe <pir@pir.net> To: "'freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org'" <freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: PAO on a 3.2 Stable system???? Message-ID: <19990906130229.A6137@pir.net> In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19990906023601.009de340@mail>; from charon@freethought.org on Mon, Sep 06, 1999 at 02:36:01AM -0700 References: <58A002A02C5ED311812E0050044517F00D231A@ERLANGEN01> <3.0.5.32.19990906023601.009de340@mail>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
charon@freethought.org probably said: > At 10:22 AM 9/6/99 +0200, Alexander Maret wrote: > >I know that PAO is supposed to be used with FreeBSD 3.2 Release > >systems. But what happens if I do a CVS-update to 3.2 Stable and > >then re-apply the PAO patches. Will this work or is it not possible > >to use PAO on Stable systems without further hacking. The PAO patches don't apply cleanly to -STABLE, be prepared for a lot of hacking around to get them all applied manually. The amount of hacking varies and PAO things filter through the standard CURRENT/RELEASE trees. > I don't believe it will work, since both PAO and -STABLE assume that > they're the only thing that's messed with your system files. I tried > loading PAO on a -STABLE system recently, but it didn't work because (I > think) PAO was trying to modify a file already changed in -STABLE, and not > expecting that, PAO crashed. "PAO crashed" doesn't make any sense. The patch command that tries to patch your system to PAO can segv when trying to apply PAO patches to -STABLE, I checked the offending patches and applied them in smaller groups or by hand. This obviously shouldn't happen. The box I'm on right now is STABLE as of a couple of weeks ago plus PAO. P. -- pir pir@pir.net pir@shore.net pir@net.tufts.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-mobile" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990906130229.A6137>