Re: updating remote 2.5 to current

["Luke Renn" <lrenn@etci.com>]

OpenBSD does use the FreeBSD of updateding the src tree.  i cvs up to update
my OpenBSD source tree all the time.  in fact, i went from 2.5 to 2.6
flawlessly by doing this and following the excellent directions on the
OpenBSD "upgrading mini-faq".

Luke

----- Original Message -----
From: Ron 'The InSaNe One' Rosson <insane@lunatic.oneinsane.net>
To: <tech@openbsd.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 1:56 PM
Subject: Re: updating remote 2.5 to current


> Coming from FreeBSD to OpenBSD recently The things I see that could help
> the project and help its growth of users would be to try and maybe adapt
> to using something like FreeBSD's cvsup to update the source and to use
> mergemaster to update the /etc. They make cvsuping source and syncing
> your machine quite easy.
>
>
> If I am out of line here then blow me off but I just thought I would
> throw my 2 cents in.
>
> TIA
>
> On Wed, 08 Dec 1999, kwooding@codetalker.com was heard blurting out:
>
> >
> > > Actually, to set the record straight, I called to ask whether I
> > > should work on trying to build an automated environment for
> > > updating, so that the lessons I was learning wouldn't have to be
> > > repeated.  You turned me down, saying "this is not a priority for
> > > us."
> >
> > A fully automated upgrade probably isn't possible without significant
> > changes to /etc. More importantly, it violates the unwritten OpenBSD
> > rule that nothing should modify files in /etc automatically.
> >
> > Having said that (and as the "maintainer" of the Upgrade mini-faq),
> > developing a concrete set of instructions for upgrading *IS*
> > important, and the work you did documenting changes to /etc is very
> > useful.
> >
> > In fact, changes to /etc deserves a whole section in the Upgrade
> > Mini-faq.  I just haven't had the time of late to do so, so thanks for
> > that.
> >
> > > According to you, folks running remote or embedded systems just
> > > never update.
> >
> > I think the issue is this. Due to the nature of the changes
> > between 2.5 and 2.6, the developers have always maintained that
> > upgrading between these particular versions is ***NOT*** recommended,
> > until we have had enough brave souls try it to properly document
> > the upgrade process.
> >
> > > Certainly this is antithetical to my 20+ years of experience in
> > > computer networking.
> >
> > True, but so is performing a remote upgrade of a box
> > without first trying the procedure in a test environment. Moving between
> > major cranks of Solaris, or <your favorite *nix> is no different.
> >
> > Basically, you're trying an upgrade under the worst possible
> > conditions: remote box, the worst two versions to move between, and no
> > tested procedure to do it. Expect problems!
> >
> > >Why do you have to be so hard to deal with?
> >
> > It's part of his charm. ;)
> >
> > Thanks for your efforts. I will make use of it when I next update the
> > mini-faq.
> >
> > -kj
> >
>
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ron Rosson              ... and a UNIX user said ...
> The InSaNe One                    rm -rf *
> insane@oneinsane.net      and all was /dev/null and *void()
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> Chaos, panic, and disorder- my work here is done.
>