A quality operating system
freebsd at edvax.de
Sat Aug 20 20:39:39 UTC 2011
On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 16:22:45 -0400, Jerry wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 11:09:53 -0700
> Michael Sierchio articulated:
> > On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Dave Pooser
> > <dave-freebsd at pooserville.com> wrote:
> > > 3) Updates are a mess. It's cool that I *can* compile a new kernel,
> > > but that I *have* to is ridiculous. Updating a server should not be
> > > more difficult than "yum update" -- full stop.
> > Are you lazy, or stupid? man freebsd-update
> I have never wasted my time with it personally; however, I thought I
> read somewhere that it did not work if the user had built a custom
That's correct. The freebsd-update program is _not_ to be used
for few specific cases, i. e. the OS version is a -STABLE or
even -CURRENT one, or the user is running a non-GENERIC kernel.
In such cases, updating from source is inteded, as freebsd-update
is a very good tool for binary updating following the -RELEASE
path (releases and security patches). _That_ is what it is
designed for. It's not a "one size fits all" program.
> From what I have seen written regarding it, you have to move the
> custom kernel out of the way and replace it with the generic kernel,
> run the freebsd-update program and then re-install the custom kernel and
> then rebuild that.
But this does still apply _only_ in cases where you're using
a X.Y-pZ release of the OS, if I understood everything correctly.
> Assuming that is correct, I can safely say that only
> a masochist would find that solution given the numerous possibilities
> for catastrophic failure any serious consideration. Obviously the KISS
> principal was considered important in this scenario.
There is another important principal: FIRST think, THEN do.
In case of problems, restore from backup (which should be
good practice in any updating scenario anyway, as in general
and in every regards). :-)
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
More information about the freebsd-questions