Hmm, I have exactly the same situation, a mission-critical server that
can't be taken offline to do an upgrade. It's running 3.4, but with a few
binaries from 4.0 that I needed to make our CGIs work (development is done
on 4.2 :).
Anyway, for the kernel it MIGHT be possible to "borrow" one from a nearby
4.0-series machine, install it, and reboot, taking the machine offline for
a couple of minutes. This is obviously a bad idea, since userspace will
still be 3.0, but it's something to think about.
Sorry this is so OT.
-- Dan Feldman
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, Matthew Emmerton wrote:
> On 7 Feb 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
>
> > Matthew Luckie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > I completely understand your plea to not use 3.0 release.
> > > I am personally using 4.2-stable. Its not my decision to use 3.0
> > > I beleive the computers running 3.0 have been running it for several years
> > > now - i.e. it was the latest available at the time.
> >
> > Well, it was a stupid decision at that time, and the decision not to
> > upgrade or replace these machines now is even stupider.
>
> Hey now, go easy. Lots of stupid decisions are made by "managers" who
> don't understand the implications of old(er) technology.
>
> I've got a 3.2-R machine which I'm forced to maintain, and the only reason
> why it's not running 3.2-S or 4.2-S is because I can't take the stupid
> thing offline. I've haggled with my boss for a 6 hour window and the
> answer is no, no, no. I've even got a 3.2-S installation waiting in
> /usr/obj.
>
> The only way I'm going to get my 3.2-R machine upgraded (and the only way
> this person is going to get their 3.0-R machine upgraded) is when it
> breaks and requires a complete reinstall to become operational.
>
> --
> Matt Emmerton
>
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
