On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 3:01 AM Antoine Jacoutot <ajacou...@bsdfrog.org> wrote:
> > The checks in question are about disk space, if the (valid!) concern is > > about losing rollback files, I'd suggest an explicit check that > > /var/syspatch is sane (local, UFS, whatever else). Every previous > syspatch > > on this system worked, only syspatch66-010_libcauth.tgz failed since it > > happened to include new files destined for /var. > > There is already a check. > Your /var/syspatch is on FFS, that's why it worked for previous syspatches. > But your /var/db is not, which is why it refused to install the new one. > The behavior is perfectly correct. Right, should have looked before I posted. Thanks, - Art
