# freebsd-update vs building?



## horseflesh (Mar 22, 2011)

I am setting up a new 8.2-RELEASE system on amd64. In the past I have only upgraded via sources but I am tempted by the binary freebsd-update system. I am not intent on wringing every last bit of performance out of the system with optimizations, it's already more powerful than it needs to be and I am happy to waste some computer power if it makes my life a little easier. 

If I can load ipnat and ipfw without modifying the GENERIC kernel it seems like a real no-brainer. (I'll have to research that--been a long time since I set up a new system.)

If I understand what I have read correctly, it's important to use EITHER freebsd-update OR compiling from source but not both. In this case do I even need the source tree on disk if I use the GENERIC kernel?

Thanks!


----------



## horseflesh (Mar 22, 2011)

Oops, I meant to say ipf, not ipfw. Looks like ipf and ipfnat do not require kernel customizations.

http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/firewalls-ipf.html

On a system such as mine, is there any reason *not* to use freebsd-update?


----------



## DutchDaemon (Mar 23, 2011)

It is a misconception that you cannot use *freebsd-update* together with a customised kernel. Just put the GENERIC kernel in /boot/GENERIC, and *freebsd-update* will happily maintain it for you. Put your custom kernel in /boot/kernel and manually rebuild it from the sources updated by the *freebsd-update* process (which is an option - see 'Components' in freebsd-update.conf(5)).


----------



## horseflesh (Mar 23, 2011)

Thank you for clarifying that.


----------

