following -stable vs patches, "make clean" needed?

Hi misc, i'm running 5.8-stable and am looking for a way automatically update my machine in case of updates. Patches are fine, but they require manual interaction and i would like to avoid that as much as possible. Both FAQ 5 [1] and the stable-page [2] propose to clean up before trying to

Re: following -stable vs patches, "make clean" needed?

https://www.mtier.org/solutions/apps/openup On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 12:39 PM, Todd wrote: > I know this is not what you asked, but openup is a great way meet your > stated goal of automated updates. > > https://www.mtier.org/solutions/apps/openupt > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at

Re: following -stable vs patches, "make clean" needed?

I know this is not what you asked, but openup is a great way meet your stated goal of automated updates. https://www.mtier.org/solutions/apps/openupt On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Nils Reuße wrote: > Hi misc, > > i'm running 5.8-stable and am looking for a way

Re: Following -stable, sources downloaded from mirror

On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 10:27:19 +0200 Johan Mellberg johan.mellb...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I want to start following -stable so I have read http://www.openbsd.org/anoncvs.html and http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq5.html#BldGetSrc as well as looking through the mailing list archives ​ for cvs

Following -stable, sources downloaded from mirror

Hi, I want to start following -stable so I have read http://www.openbsd.org/anoncvs.html and http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq5.html#BldGetSrc as well as looking through the mailing list archives ​ for cvs from preloaded source​ . I thought that I'd preload the sources so downloaded all of sys

Following -stable, preloaded src

Hi, I want to start following -stable so I have read http://www.openbsd.org/anoncvs.html and http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq5.html#BldGetSrc as well as looking through the mailing list archives​ for cvs from preloaded source​. I thought that I'd preload the sources so downloaded all of sys, src

Re: Following -stable, sources downloaded from mirror

On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 11:59:14 +0200 Johan Mellberg johan.mellb...@gmail.com wrote: dan mclaughlin skrev den 2015-04-11 10:55: On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 10:27:19 +0200 Johan Mellberg johan.mellb...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I want to start following -stable so I have read http://www.openbsd.org

Re: Following -stable, sources downloaded from mirror

dan mclaughlin skrev den 2015-04-11 10:55: On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 10:27:19 +0200 Johan Mellberg johan.mellb...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I want to start following -stable so I have read http://www.openbsd.org/anoncvs.html and http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq5.html#BldGetSrc as well as looking

Re: Following -stable, sources downloaded from mirror

dan mclaughlin skrev den 2015-04-11 12:16: On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 11:59:14 +0200 Johan Mellberg johan.mellb...@gmail.com wrote: dan mclaughlin skrev den 2015-04-11 10:55: On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 10:27:19 +0200 Johan Mellberg johan.mellb...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I want to start following -stable

Re: following stable, extra file sets?

install... Choosing sets is not the problem, as i indicated in the first post, i *chose* bsd, base41, etc41, comp41 and man41 file sets as they were the required sets. The question is, when updating src and following stable, is there any way to _not_ have the game41 and misc41 installed when

Re: following stable, extra file sets?

On 6/30/07, Aaron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok this has answered the question, and thanks.This raises another question for me.. If updating just the sets that you install, and I am making an assumption here that people would want to update code when needed, and be supported, why even give the

Re: following stable, extra file sets?

On Saturday, June 30, 2007 at 21:54:00 -0500, Aaron wrote: That sounds good, and i read http://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade41.html about upgrading, and http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq5.html#Release When following stable with the method described in the faq, i didn't notice anything about final

following stable, extra file sets?

Just a quick, hopefully easy, question for everyone. I just installed a new 4.1 system, took a look at my options for keeping it up to date and decided that 'stable' would be best for me. When i installed i chose bsd, base41, etc41, comp41 and man41. I went through the following stable

Re: following stable, extra file sets?

the following stable procedures verbatim and everything worked just fine as far as i can tell. Which procedure, exactly ? Please provide a link. What i found strange is now it seems as if i have gained the misc41 and game41 file sets as a result of following stable. Does this sound correct

Re: following stable, extra file sets?

James Hartley wrote: On 6/30/07, *Aaron* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What i found strange is now it seems as if i have gained the misc41 and game41 file sets as a result of following stable. Does this sound correct? The following link from the FAQ

Re: following stable, extra file sets?

On 6/30/07, Aaron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What i found strange is now it seems as if i have gained the misc41 and game41 file sets as a result of following stable. Does this sound correct? The following link from the FAQ describes what the roles of each file set. Perhaps this will provide

Re: following stable, extra file sets?

went through the following stable procedures verbatim and everything worked just fine as far as i can tell. Which procedure, exactly ? Please provide a link. Sorry about that.. Here is the procedure i follow when i update to 'stable': http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq5.html#BldGetSrc *Following

Re: following stable, extra file sets?

On Saturday, June 30, 2007 at 15:13:31 -0500, Aaron wrote: What i found strange is now it seems as if i have gained the misc41 and game41 file sets as a result of following stable. Does this sound correct? Yes, that's the way make build works. It compiles and installs everything in the source

Re: following stable, extra file sets?

Maurice Janssen writes: Is there anyway to _not_ get these extra sets as part of following stable? I don't know that it hurts anything, but I have no use for them on the system and would like to keep it as minimalistic as possible. I'm sure it's possible to modify the tree

Re: following stable, extra file sets?

Marco S Hyman wrote: Maurice Janssen writes: Is there anyway to _not_ get these extra sets as part of following stable? I don't know that it hurts anything, but I have no use for them on the system and would like to keep it as minimalistic as possible. I'm sure it's possible

Re: following stable, extra file sets?

On 6/30/07, Aaron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok this has answered the question, and thanks.This raises another question for me.. If updating just the sets that you install, and I am making an assumption here that people would want to update code when needed, and be supported, why even give the

Re: following stable, extra file sets?

. Also, you can make a -stable release(8) on one machine and still choose your sets whenever you install/upgrade from them. --david That sounds good, and i read http://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade41.html about upgrading, and http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq5.html#Release When following stable

overpartitioning/dump [was Re: following -stable]

On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 07:54:00PM -0500, Nick Holland wrote: ... Or, just skip the usr/obj partition... Having been stung a few times by over partitioning recently, What's overpartitioning? ;-) That's when you say, 500M is plenty large for /var, except for this mail archive

Re: overpartitioning/dump [was Re: following -stable]

On Sat, Dec 23, 2006 at 08:05:58AM +, Craig Skinner wrote: I thought it was best pratice to umount a slice before dumping, but a quick flick thourgh the man page states: files-to-dump is either a mountpoint of a filesystem or a list of files and directories on a single filesystem to be

Re: overpartitioning/dump [was Re: following -stable]

On Sat, Dec 23, 2006 at 07:58:06PM +0100, Joachim Schipper wrote: I interpret the above snippet to mean `dump works best on filesystems, not files'. As to unmounting before dumping, that's possible but, IME, not usually necessary. Thanks, I'll keep that in mind for when it is not practical,

following -stable

Hello, when following -stable and also following the advice to place /usr/obj on a separate partition, how much space is recommended these days? I've just discovered that 1 gig isn't enough. Thank you! Best, --Toni++

Re: following -stable

Hi Toni, when following -stable and also following the advice to place /usr/obj on a separate partition, how much space is recommended these days? I've never done that, as disks on my build machines tend to be regularly fast PATA/SATA disks. `sudo rm -rf /usr/obj/*` takes some 8 seconds or so

Re: following -stable

Toni Mueller wrote: Hello, when following -stable and also following the advice to place /usr/obj on a separate partition, how much space is recommended these days? I've just discovered that 1 gig isn't enough. Thank you! Best, --Toni++ barely over 1G...at the moment. It's

Re: following -stable

On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 10:06:03AM +0100, Toni Mueller wrote: Hello, when following -stable and also following the advice to place /usr/obj on a separate partition, how much space is recommended these days? I've just discovered that 1 gig isn't enough. About 4 GB here, which seems

Re: following -stable

:29:23 -0500, Nick Holland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Toni Mueller wrote: when following -stable and also following the advice to place /usr/obj on a separate partition, how much space is recommended these days? I've just discovered that 1 gig isn't enough. barely over 1G...at the moment. 8

Re: following -stable

Toni Mueller wrote: ... It's not getting smaller anytime soon, so if planning ahead is something you like to do, I'd probably leave at least 2G for future growth. That's why I asked... any estimates about the growth rate? not really. Things putt along slowly for a while, then suddenly