docs/163102: linprocfs mounted in wrong location in Handbook

Kevin Baxter voidchicken at
Wed Dec 7 18:38:44 UTC 2011

On 12/07/2011 10:26, Manolis Kiagias wrote:
> On 7/12/2011 7:20 μμ, Patrick Lamaiziere wrote:
>> The following reply was made to PR docs/163102; it has been noted by 
>> From: Patrick Lamaiziere<patfbsd at>
>> To: bug-followup at<bug-followup at>
>> Cc: Kevin Baxter<voidchicken at>
>> Subject: Re: docs/163102: linprocfs mounted in wrong location in 
>> Handbook
>> Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 18:02:34 +0100
>>   Le Wed, 7 Dec 2011 15:30:15 GMT,
>>   Kevin Baxter<voidchicken at>  a ιcrit :
>> >   $ ls /usr/compat
>> >   ls: /usr/compat: No such file or directory
>> >   $ ls -ld /compat
>> >   drwxr-xr-x   3 root  wheel        3 Jan 17  2010 compat
>> >
>> >   It isn't a symlink on my system. At what point in installation is it
>> >   supposed to have been created? I don't see a mention of that
>> >  anywhere in the Handbook. Chapter 11.2 even refers to /compat/linux
>> >  instead of /usr/compat/linux.
>>   On 9.0 bsdinstall does not create the /compat symlink. Or
>>   even /compat, it is created when you install the linux base.
>>   You have to move /compat to /usr/compat and create the link by hand.
> I've checked on 9.0-RC2 and the link is there, but my installs were 
> upgraded from 8.2-RELEASE, so you may have a point there. I'll check 
> on a clean 9.0-RC3 install shortly and report findings.
>>   This is a bug in bsdinstall imho. Sysintall did it. I don't know if
>>   this is fixed (I've installed with a 9.0 beta usb key)
>>   Regards.
> If it happens that 9.0 installs into /compat, we should either add 
> this to the documentation or file a PR so that either the linux_base 
> package or bsdinstall creates the link.
> But from the current PR it seems the OP was using 8.2-RELEASE which 
> should not exhibit this.

I'm using a ZFS root, so I used the wiki's RootOnZFS page to install 
(which doesn't use sysinstall, and doesn't mention /compat).

So is this a case of a non-standard installation being unsupported? 
Should the wiki be changed to include that symlink? Or should one of the 
install scripts be changed to make the symlink?

More information about the freebsd-doc mailing list