Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 13:53:00 +0200 From: Thor Legvold <tlegvold@c2i.net> To: Kent Stewart <kstewart@3-cities.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Upgrade questions Message-ID: <00042414201300.00309@valhall.c2i.net> References: <39036257.C004BD9B@3-cities.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 23 Apr 2000, you wrote: > Thor Legvold wrote: > >=20 <snip> > > All seems stable, I've restored the files I managed to save and have = only done > > some simple configuration of the existing install to make things more= livable. > > So far the system seems very responsive and useable, although certain= elements > > of the KDE system just don't work for me. > >=20 > > I'd now like to consider upgrading and have several questions about i= t. My > > upgrading relates to four areas: > >=20 > > 1. 3.3-RELEASE (actually I think I already upp'ed it to -STABLE) to 4= =2E0-RELEASE > > (or possibly -STABLE if it exists). I understand that all I need to d= o is > > download the boot floppies, reboot and use /stand/sysinstall to choos= e > > "upgrade" and everything goes automatically via ftp. I've done it onc= e before > > and it seemed to work well, except for the partition glitch mentioned= above. I > > didn't change (knowingly) partition information (it was after all an = upgrade, > > not a new install) so I imagine the problem was there from before. A= re there > > other things I should know about 4.0 before I upgrade? 4.0 is an impr= ovement > > over 3.3, right...? Or should I instead go with 3.4? There are so man= y versions > > available it's difficult to know what is the mainstream basically sta= ble > > version eveyone uses - there is 3.3, 3.4, 4.0, 2.8, etc, all with "st= able" (or > > at least "release") status. From my experience with other Unix system= s, usually > > the latest (non-developmental) version is the most stable (bug fixes, > > optimizing of code, etc), i.e. the latest "release". Does that apply = also to > > FreeBSD? >=20 > I'm curious what parts of KDE don't work. I pretty much did a full > install of KDE and haven't found any but I'm not using them all. kppp doesn't work. kvirc dumped core, now (after a fresh install) it seems to work ok.=20 kpilot doesn't work, but it's probably a configuration issue on my end. krn doesn't work (some lib not being found), I've installed knews instead= =2E =20 > The source upgrade via cvsup to RELENG_4 can be troublesome. Once you > have finished cvsup'ing, you have an /usr/src/UPDATING document that > you must follow to the letter. I tried and it died in the middle of > the "make installkernel KERNEL=3DRUBY" with an error=3D64. At that poin= t, > I had a mix of code and the easiest way out was a clean install. I've Unerstood. I haven't (yet) built a new kernel. I've done it under Linux, = and don't imagine any problem under FreeBSD, but the default kernel works fin= e for now so it's not highest on my list. I'd like first and foremost to get th= e system updated and install stuff I need for day to day "productivity" (Ab= iWord, NetScape or similar, spreadsheet, ICQ, email, etc), then I can start expl= oring the system in more depth as I get time. > never had an upgrade from source fail but this one did. My system > needed restructuring because I still had my novice install with a / > partition that included /usr, /tmp, and /var. The rebuild left / as a > 100MB partition and the other three had their own partitions. The > sizes were what I considered as appropriate for my needs. I upgraded my previous install, first to 3.4, then to 4.0-RELEASE via ftp= and /stand/sysinstall. It seemed to work perfecctly. Of course there was the overlapping partition problem that ended up hosing both my Windows and BS= D partitions.... I've installed initially with separate /, /usr, /usr/local, /var, /home a= nd /tmp partitions. With 4.5GB of disk I have given the partitions room to g= row without wasting too much space. /usr, /usr/local and /home have over 1GB = each. I've used BSD 3.3 Unix (NextStep) for many years and have tried Linux sev= eral times, but never really got to like it (Linux). So I figured FreeBSD was = a perfect choice, since I already know a bit about BSD. Unfortunatley I was= n't able to unstall it untill recently because of driver issues, my SCSI card= only appeared as supported a half year ago or so (DPT). Back to my question - I'm not interested in a new install, because I don'= t have the 4.0 media and don't wan't to wait 6-8 weeks for it (what it takes to = order on line and wait for the post and customs, by which time it costs me twic= e what Walnut Creek takes). I have an ISDN link which puts an upgrade at around = 2-4 hours depending on what packages I choose. So what I would like to know i= s if I'm better off doing a source upgrade (via CVS or other means) or a /stand/sysinstall "package" upgrade. > The end result was a number of improvements. I was happy that I > upgraded but I spent of couple of unhappy days until I got back to an > operating setup. My dial out worked the night that I started the clean This is to be expected, IMO. > install. I had copied /etc onto a backup file system that wasn't > affected by the restructure. I had complications from an overclocked Sounds like a good idea. I copy everything out to a jaz cartridge prior t= o upgrading. > Celeron 300a that was dying in the middle of all of this. Once I > resinstalled the slower Celeron 433a, everything worked fine and the I'm on a 300A, it's been running since I bought it at 450MHz with no prob= lems under any of the 4 OS's I use. Rock solid. Mainboard is an Abit BH6. I've occasionally switched it down when I suspected OC'ing hangs, but these tu= rned out to be Windows problems (Microsoft), not the hardware. I don't recall = how long I've had the new board/CPU, but I think over a year now. > clean install involved the least effort on my part since I started > using FreeBSD-2.2.8. Of course. But since I don't have the media.... I suppose I could downloa= d the ISO and burn it onto a CD under Win98, but I think the ISO is significant= ly larger than an upgrade would be (not sure, MB/download time-wise what the difference would be). > > 2. XFree86 3.3.4 - XFree86 3.3.6 or possibly the new 4.0 that just ca= me out (if > > I recall correctly). Should I remove the 3.3.4 package and reinstall = the newer > > version, or can I install over the old to preserve my settings? Shoul= d one use > > the ports/packages collection directly, go via /stand/sysinstall (whi= ch > > basically seems to do the same thing, but is automated) or compile fr= om source? >=20 > I haven't tried XFree86-4.0 yet. Do I uninstall 3.3.4 first, or install 4.0 over it? > > 3. KDE 1.1.1 - KDE 1.1.2 - much of the same questions apply here, and= it > > requires several packages that aren't in 3.3 (or 4.0 I beleive, Mesa,= QT, some > > other stuff). When I try to install the newer packages they conflict = with other > > installed stuff. Should I remove older versions before installing new= er ones, > > or can one "upgrade" by simply installing over the old install (I not= ice that > > pkg_info then reports several versions, and it might make removing on= e later > > impossible if they have common files....). When trying to remove olde= r versions > > I get messages about other packages requiring them, and the removal i= s aborted. > > I could force removal, but wouldn't that mess up the dependency infor= mation? > > Even after I reinstall a newer version? >=20 > Normally, I follow the instructions from "pkg_version -c". It > frequently shows a "-f" option to force the removal. Just don't do > anything to develop the uzi_foot_syndrome, i.e., modify your x-libs > while you are running x. I think KDE is really frequent contributor to > the ufs awards - the computer equivalent of the Darwin Award :).=20 I'll look into pkg_version -c, I've seen -f, but don't want everything ge= tting out of sync with each other. What's ufs awards? What's Darwin award? > > 4. General upgrading of non-system components (programs, libraries, e= tc) > > For example, Netscape Communicator 4.61 to 4.72 or newer, AbiWord 0.5= =2E5 to > > 0.7.6, etc. Should one uninstall the exisiting package/port before in= stalling > > the newer one, or simply install over the old one? Some programs (eit= her ports, > > packages or free standing dists) require newer (or different) version= s of > > certain libraries, toolkits, etc. Should one go ahead and upgrade thi= s as well, > > or install it in parallell to the older version? It seems the system = components > > only end up less and less in sync with each other that way. >=20 > I installed Netscape for Linux 4.72 at my original install. It worked > on the first connection to the Internet. What more can I say. Murphy As does my 4.61 version (although the fonts/scaling often make it impossi= ble to read a page). > usually sits on my shoulder and if there are 2+ bugs, I will see one > of them. Don't uninstall until you have a good build of a port. Then, > you do the pkg_delete and "make install". A package is already build > and you need to do the pkg_delete first and then pkg_add. And when pkg_delete refuses because of dependancies, what do you do then.= =2E? BTW - where do you store your src files once downloaded? I learned to put= them in /usr/src or /usr/local/src, but this doesn't seem to go well with Free= BSD's directory sttructure. > Good luck, > Kent Thanks, Thor To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?00042414201300.00309>