Binary update to -STABLE? And if so, what do I get?

2019-02-13 Thread Karl Denninger
I know (and have done) binary updates between -RELEASE versions But 12 has a problem with -RELEASE and IPv6, which was recently fixed and MFC'd.  So now I have an interesting situation in that I have two machines in the field running 11.2 that do things for me at one of the "shared colo" joints, a

Re: Binary update to -STABLE? And if so, what do I get?

2019-02-13 Thread Kurt Jaeger
Hi! > I know (and have done) binary updates between -RELEASE versions [...] > How do I do this, say, coming from 11.2 and wanting to target 12 post > the IPv6 fix MFC? You can't. Either wait until a 12.0 with the fix included or 12.1 is released, or you fetch the source with the fix included, and

Re: Binary update to -STABLE? And if so, what do I get?

2019-02-13 Thread Karl Denninger
On 2/13/2019 07:49, Kurt Jaeger wrote: > Hi! > >> I know (and have done) binary updates between -RELEASE versions > [...] >> How do I do this, say, coming from 11.2 and wanting to target 12 post >> the IPv6 fix MFC? > You can't. Either wait until a 12.0 with the fix included or > 12.1 is released,

Re: Binary update to -STABLE? And if so, what do I get?

2019-02-13 Thread Jason Tubnor
On Thu, 14 Feb 2019 at 00:53, Karl Denninger wrote: > > > You can't. Either wait until a 12.0 with the fix included or > > 12.1 is released, or you fetch the source with the fix included, > > and build from source. > Got it -- thanks. Wait it shall be. > > > I also have hit this IPv6 issue (I th

Re: Binary update to -STABLE? And if so, what do I get?

2019-02-14 Thread Pete French
On 14/02/2019 01:43, Jason Tubnor wrote: I also have hit this IPv6 issue (I thought I was going crazy until I worked it out) and other iflib issues in 12.0, which have been fixed in -STABLE that really should be patched in 12.0 or bring forward an early 12.1 release. For our use case, 12.0 is

Re: Binary update to -STABLE? And if so, what do I get?

2019-02-14 Thread Kevin Oberman
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 3:10 AM Pete French wrote: > > > On 14/02/2019 01:43, Jason Tubnor wrote: > > I also have hit this IPv6 issue (I thought I was going crazy until I > worked > > it out) and other iflib issues in 12.0, which have been fixed in -STABLE > > that really should be patched in 12.

Re: Binary update to -STABLE? And if so, what do I get?

2019-02-14 Thread Freddie Cash
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 10:13 AM Kevin Oberman wrote: > On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 3:10 AM Pete French > wrote: > > On 14/02/2019 01:43, Jason Tubnor wrote: > > > I also have hit this IPv6 issue (I thought I was going crazy until I > > worked > > > it out) and other iflib issues in 12.0, which have

Re: Binary update to -STABLE? And if so, what do I get?

2019-02-15 Thread Patrick M. Hausen
Good morning, > Am 14.02.2019 um 19:11 schrieb Kevin Oberman : > Far and away the biggest is the requirement to build from sources. It's not > a big deal for me, but if I still had many systems to deal with, that would > be a pain. > […] > The bottom line is that the only real reasons I see for no

Re: Binary update to -STABLE? And if so, what do I get?

2019-02-15 Thread Gregory Byshenk
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 10:22:06AM -0800, Freddie Cash wrote: > On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 10:13 AM Kevin Oberman wrote: > > Far and away the biggest is the requirement to build from sources. It's not > > a big deal for me, but if I still had many systems to deal with, that would > > be a pain. > J

Re: Binary update to -STABLE? And if so, what do I get?

2019-02-16 Thread Pete French
On 15/02/2019 08:06, Patrick M. Hausen wrote: We build from sources centrally, then zfs send/receive /usr/src and /usr/obj to all of the machines, then just do the install(kernel|world) part on all of them. I do this occasionally, but in the main I sumply NFS mount /usr/src and /usr/obj and