Folks,
I've seen the migration guide at
<http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.4R/migration-guide.html>, and the
thread at
<http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2005-September/018151.html>,
but I was wondering about the specific sequence of the upgrade
process.
In particular, I'm wondering if I should go from
RELENG_4_11_0_RELEASE direct to RELENG_5_4, or if I should instead go
first to RELENG_5_0_0_RELEASE then to RELENG_5_4?
I think the individual steps to follow and commands to execute
during the upgrade are clear enough. But it's not obvious to me as
to which precise CVSup targets should be used to pull down the source
that would be compiled, etc....
--
Brad Knowles, <brad@stop.mail-abuse.org>
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755
SAGE member since 1995. See <http://www.sage.org/> for more info.
I went via cvsup and a source tree, straight to 5.4 stable from 4.10 stable. Brad Knowles wrote:> Folks, > > I've seen the migration guide at > <http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.4R/migration-guide.html>, and the > thread at > <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2005-September/018151.html>, > but I was wondering about the specific sequence of the upgrade process. > > In particular, I'm wondering if I should go from > RELENG_4_11_0_RELEASE direct to RELENG_5_4, or if I should instead go > first to RELENG_5_0_0_RELEASE then to RELENG_5_4? > > > I think the individual steps to follow and commands to execute > during the upgrade are clear enough. But it's not obvious to me as to > which precise CVSup targets should be used to pull down the source that > would be compiled, etc.... >-- ______ Paul T. Root / _ \ 1977 MGB / /|| \\ ||\/ || _ | || || || \ ||__// \______/
On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 09:42:24PM +0200, Brad Knowles wrote:> Folks, > > I've seen the migration guide at > <http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.4R/migration-guide.html>, and the > thread at > <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2005-September/018151.html>, > but I was wondering about the specific sequence of the upgrade process.And you should of course also read /usr/src/UPDATING as usual.> > In particular, I'm wondering if I should go from > RELENG_4_11_0_RELEASE direct to RELENG_5_4, or if I should instead go > first to RELENG_5_0_0_RELEASE then to RELENG_5_4?I would recommend going first to RELENG_5_3_0_RELEASE, and then to RELENG_5_4, but going directly to RELENG_5_4 will probably work fine as well - there were not all that many changes between 5.3 and 5.4. 5.3-RELEASE was the first stable release from the 5.x branch. I would not recommend using any earlier 5.x release. (I.e. don't use RELENG_5_0_0_RELEASE.) Of course, the officially recommended upgrade path is to backup all data (a very good idea in any case), reformat the disk, install the new system from scratch, and restore datafiles from the backup - but upgrading via source is certainly possible as well.> > > I think the individual steps to follow and commands to execute > during the upgrade are clear enough. But it's not obvious to me as > to which precise CVSup targets should be used to pull down the source > that would be compiled, etc....-- <Insert your favourite quote here.> Erik Trulsson ertr1013@student.uu.se
At 9:42 PM +0200 2005-09-21, Brad Knowles wrote:> I've seen the migration guide at > <http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.4R/migration-guide.html>, and the > thread at > ><http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2005-September/018151.html>, > but I was wondering about the specific sequence of the upgrade process.Okay, well I've completed this part of the processing, going from 4.11-R to releng_5_4, and everything seems to be okay. I now need to make a custom kernel and to do a portupgrade, but unless something goes horribly wrong it would appear that this process was relatively painless. However, it would be nice if mergemaster could be made to automatically accept changes that occur only in the comments of the files it is trying to merge. That way, many fewer "fluff" changes would be presented during the merge process, and people would be left with needing to confirm changes regarding only actual functional code. Anyway, thanks again everyone! -- Brad Knowles, <brad@stop.mail-abuse.org> "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755 SAGE member since 1995. See <http://www.sage.org/> for more info.
Brad Knowles wrote:> However, it would be nice if mergemaster could be made to > automatically accept changes that occur only in the comments of the > files it is trying to merge.What would be nice is if people actually read the man page for mergemaster, which has had this example in it for a long time now.
On 9/29/05, Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> wrote:> Brad Knowles wrote: > > > However, it would be nice if mergemaster could be made to > > automatically accept changes that occur only in the comments of the > > files it is trying to merge. > > What would be nice is if people actually read the man page for mergemaster, > which has had this example in it for a long time now.I just read the mergemaster man page (6.0B2 box), and it contains no usch example, or reference. None of the options seem to have this effect either. Maybe you are thinking of an Open- of NetBSD mergemaster?