Re: Alternative way to do -stable to -current upgrade

2000-03-10 Thread Matt Loschert
On Tue, 7 Mar 2000, Doug Barton wrote: > I've been meaning to post this for a while. I recently upgraded two way > old 4.0 systems to post-signal changes -current. It's not quite a 3.x -> > 4.0-Current upgrade, but it's close. I had to do a few things > differently than what's in Updating,

Re: Alternative way to do -stable to -current upgrade

2000-03-07 Thread Doug Barton
Nik Clayton wrote: > That, at least, was not the case with an upgrade I attempted a few days > ago. On booting with kernel.GENERIC (from -current) it hung mounting the > disks. Trying to go back to kernel.stable didn't work, because I'd had > to update the /dev entries for -current, and they wo

Re: Alternative way to do -stable to -current upgrade

2000-03-07 Thread Brooks Davis
On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 04:49:06PM -0700, Warner Losh wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Brooks Davis writes: > : You don't need to update /dev though. As long as you don't change > : anything else, a 4.0 kernel will work just fine with a 3.x /dev and > : userland (other then top and friends

Re: Alternative way to do -stable to -current upgrade

2000-03-07 Thread Warner Losh
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Brooks Davis writes: : You don't need to update /dev though. As long as you don't change : anything else, a 4.0 kernel will work just fine with a 3.x /dev and : userland (other then top and friends). You can delay updating /dev : until later as the ata code will de

Re: Alternative way to do -stable to -current upgrade

2000-03-07 Thread Brooks Davis
On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 07:14:42PM +, Nik Clayton wrote: > On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 10:19:57AM -0800, Brooks Davis wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 11:01:09AM +, Nik Clayton wrote: > > > To which the response has been nil. At this point, you're either all > > > struck dumb by the stagger

Re: Alternative way to do -stable to -current upgrade

2000-03-07 Thread Nik Clayton
On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 10:19:57AM -0800, Brooks Davis wrote: > On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 11:01:09AM +, Nik Clayton wrote: > > To which the response has been nil. At this point, you're either all > > struck dumb by the staggering simplicity and elegance of this approach, > > or you're sat there

Re: Alternative way to do -stable to -current upgrade

2000-03-07 Thread Nik Clayton
On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 09:20:01AM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote: > Nik Clayton wrote: > >> 5. Mount all the fixed disk partitions, and then (assuming they're all > >> mounted under /mnt/root) > >> > >> cd /mnt/root/usr/src && make DESTDIR=/mnt/root > >> > >> 7. Build and install

Re: Alternative way to do -stable to -current upgrade

2000-03-07 Thread Brooks Davis
On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 11:01:09AM +, Nik Clayton wrote: > Quoting the whole thing deliberately: > > On Sun, Mar 05, 2000 at 08:24:35PM +, Nik Clayton wrote: [snip] > > To which the response has been nil. At this point, you're either all > struck dumb by the staggering simplicity and el

Re: Alternative way to do -stable to -current upgrade

2000-03-07 Thread Steve Kargl
Nik Clayton wrote: >> 5. Mount all the fixed disk partitions, and then (assuming they're all >> mounted under /mnt/root) >> >> cd /mnt/root/usr/src && make DESTDIR=/mnt/root >> >> >> 7. Build and install a new kernel >> > > Come on then, which is it? > Okay, here's some

Re: Alternative way to do -stable to -current upgrade

2000-03-07 Thread Nik Clayton
Quoting the whole thing deliberately: On Sun, Mar 05, 2000 at 08:24:35PM +, Nik Clayton wrote: > I had an abortive -stable to -current upgrade late last week, despite > following the directions in UPGRADING, the two kernels I built (one > custom, one GENERIC) both froze on me during the reboo

Alternative way to do -stable to -current upgrade

2000-03-06 Thread Nik Clayton
Hi guys, I had an abortive -stable to -current upgrade late last week, despite following the directions in UPGRADING, the two kernels I built (one custom, one GENERIC) both froze on me during the reboot process. I'm a little wary of doing it again like that, because it does take some time to fix