Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 20 May 2011 10:26:01 -0400
From:      Chris Brennan <xaero@xaerolimit.net>
To:        Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de>
Cc:        FreeBSD <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: A possibly odd upgrade question
Message-ID:  <BANLkTimSwsDFkYZUkBs46VJThddyq-jWVQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20110520161857.55b4cc8c.freebsd@edvax.de>
References:  <BANLkTiki_yzeYNGVsSunk0H6j0EY%2BAb2Zg@mail.gmail.com> <20110504142626.539c2b6f@scorpio> <BANLkTime92wrMOUhESWVRpLjHGCd9Sc9RA@mail.gmail.com> <4DC1CA49.8060801@onetel.com> <20110504181106.4ea5b8e7@scorpio> <BANLkTi=frhi1=bg-hPvMkcbagf8EXv8YgA@mail.gmail.com> <20110519224049.a97c15fa.freebsd@edvax.de> <BANLkTik58N1KhzXTR_B0UPPdrA0%2BfeS4aQ@mail.gmail.com> <20110519230402.faa010bd.freebsd@edvax.de> <BANLkTi=m86B_N9D_uYvDubxzFC_z_kkieQ@mail.gmail.com> <20110520161857.55b4cc8c.freebsd@edvax.de>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:18 AM, Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> wrote:

On Thu, 19 May 2011 21:58:13 -0400, Chris Brennan <xaero@xaerolimit.net>
> wrote:
> > One last question ... hopefully lol. am I going to run into any issues w/
> > the default fbsd6 layout?
> >
> > [root@Ziggy [~]# df -h
> > Filesystem     Size    Used   Avail Capacity  Mounted on
> > /dev/ad0s1a    496M    328M    128M    72%    /
>
> Maybe not so good (as a default) as soon as you're going
> to compile kernels for 8.x, where a / size of 1G would
> be better (although you can even get a FreeBSD / partition
> fully functional in < 500 MB).
>
> The rest of the df output looks normal.
>
>
>
> > What I think I failed to previously mention is that this machine started
> out
> > with fbsd6.x, was upgraded many times from 6x though 7.1 where it fell
> into
> > disuse. With my recent repurpose of this box ... I'm concerned that it
> might
> > be a moot point if base won't fit on rot root slice.
>
> In this case, you should switch off all debugging for the
> kernel, and maybe even omit the backup kernel.OLD mechanism.
> But attention! This can be dangerous! Still you have the
> option to boot from a live system (Fixit should be enough)
> to manually make a backup copy of the running kernel, and
> in case anything fails at boot stage, use the live sytem
> to re-"install" the old kernel. But in fact, this should
> not be required.



OK, I am off now to research how to build the kernel w/o debugging symbols
... then I shall embark on this.

-- 
> A: Yes.
> >Q: Are you sure?
> >>A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.

> >>>Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BANLkTimSwsDFkYZUkBs46VJThddyq-jWVQ>