# which way is better to have 8.2 stable



## mfaridi (Oct 28, 2011)

I want use FreeBSD 8.2 stable. which way is better for have stable

1- I go this  link
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/snapshots/201105/
and download FreeBSD 8.2 stable DVD1 and start clean install

2- I download FreeBSD 8.2 release and after install, I do compile and buildword to have FreeBSD stable


----------



## jrm@ (Oct 28, 2011)

A RELEASE is a snapshot of the source tree, whereas STABLE is a branch.  This means STABLE is changing on a regular basis.  As you can see by the date of the link you pasted, that snapshot is fairly old.  Also, if you have a working system with 8.2-RELEASE there's no need to wipe it.  

You can update your source tree and do a buildworld.  Another option is to use the binary updater, freebsd-update().  If you have a generic kernel no compiling will be necessary.  If you have a custom kernel you will have to build/install a new kernel.

So, either of your options will work.  If you want a recent snapshot of STABLE either go with buildworld or a binary update with freebsd-update.


----------



## wblock@ (Oct 28, 2011)

ITYM freebsd-update(8).


----------



## htutt (Oct 28, 2011)

BTW, If I upgrade my 8.0-RELEASE to 8.2-RELEASE, it's just as following;

```
# freebsd-update -r 8.2-RELEASE upgrade
```
Should I do this 
	
	



```
# freebsd-update install
```
 ?
What should I do next?


----------



## SirDice (Oct 28, 2011)

mingrone said:
			
		

> Another option is to use the binary updater, freebsd-update().


You can't update to -STABLE or -CURRENT with freebsd-update(8).



> The freebsd-update tool is used to fetch, install, and rollback binary updates to the FreeBSD base system.  Note that updates are only available if they are being built for the FreeBSD release and architecture being used; in particular, the FreeBSD Security Team only builds updates for releases shipped in binary form by the FreeBSD Release Engineering Team, e.g., FreeBSD 7.3-RELEASE and FreeBSD 8.0, *but not FreeBSD 6.3-STABLE or FreeBSD 9.0-CURRENT.*


----------



## jrm@ (Oct 28, 2011)

SirDice said:
			
		

> You can't update to -STABLE or -CURRENT with freebsd-update(8).



D'oh of course.  I just read that the other day in the top paragraph of the man page too!



> ...only available if they are being built for the FreeBSD release and architecture being used.


  So, @mfaridi cancel the freebsd-update() option.  Sorry for spreading misinformation and thanks for the correction @SirDice.

@htutt, to upgrade from 8.0-RELEASE to 8.2-RELEASE with freebsd-update():

`# freebsd-update upgrade -r 8.2-RELEASE`

Configuration files will then be updated.  Once that's done,

`# freebsd-update install`

`# shutdown -r now`

Once the system reboots run 
`# freebsd-update install`
again to install new userland components.


----------



## mfaridi (Oct 28, 2011)

thanks all guys 
so I ust type 

```
freebsd-update upgrade -r 8.2-stable
```
and then type

```
freebsd-update install
```
and then type

```
shutdown -r now
```
and after reboot I type

```
freebsd-update install
```


----------



## DutchDaemon (Oct 28, 2011)

No ... You cannot upgrade to a -STABLE version with freebsd-update(8) ...


----------



## jrm@ (Oct 28, 2011)

@mfaridi, you will have to update your sources to the 8.2-STABLE branch and then do a buildworld as described in the handbook.  As was pointed out by @SirDice, freebsd-update cannot be used to update to the STABLE branch.  My first post was incorrect.  Sorry for the confusion.


----------



## htutt (Oct 29, 2011)

@ALL
To upgrade 8.0-RELEASE to 8.2-RELEASE, how much size of data in (MB or GB) have to be fetched? I have less than 512 kb speed and since yesterday I've started, but until now not yet finished.


----------



## SirDice (Oct 29, 2011)

A complete 8.2-STABLE source tree is about 650MB.


----------



## htutt (Oct 29, 2011)

@SirDice
It is too much for its connection. I think I should do rollback, shouldn't I? Maybe later FreeBSD 9 and ask for CD/DVD where download speed is fast and install new release. Upgrading to 8.2 makes me aged and die.


----------



## wblock@ (Oct 29, 2011)

SirDice said:
			
		

> A complete 8.2-STABLE source tree is about 650MB.



I have 543M in /usr/src.  And most of that can be installed from an install CD, so csup(1) only needs to download changes.


----------



## SirDice (Oct 29, 2011)

wblock@ said:
			
		

> I have 543M in /usr/src.


Odd, I wonder why we have different sizes?

Csup'ed RELENG_8 yesterday and did a `# du -sk /usr/src/` to get my value.


----------



## wblock@ (Oct 29, 2011)

`% du -hd0 /usr/src`

```
543M	/usr/src
```

csupped immediately before.  Maybe you have 100M of local patches?


----------



## SirDice (Oct 29, 2011)

I shouldn't have 

Perhaps it's some old stuff.. I've been using this tree for quite a while.

Oh, well. When I'm done building I'll clean out the lot and start fresh. Or maybe move the old stuff out of the way and see what the difference is.


----------



## DutchDaemon (Oct 30, 2011)

I'm at 1.5 GB for a FreeBSD 9.0-RC1 /usr/src from subversion... Wonder what the blow-up is there.


----------



## wblock@ (Oct 30, 2011)

DutchDaemon said:
			
		

> I'm at 1.5 GB for a FreeBSD 9.0-RC1 /usr/src from subversion... Wonder what the blow-up is there.



I'd guess all the .svn directories.
`% find /usr/src -name .svn -exec du -hd0 {} \+ | less`


----------



## SNK (Oct 30, 2011)

RELENG_9 should be around 750M:

`% du -skh /usr/src`

```
748M    /usr/src
```

Last csup was an hour ago.


----------



## gkontos (Oct 30, 2011)

First one with compression off:


```
NAME                      USED   AVAIL  REFER  MOUNTPOINT
zroot/usr/src             686M   898G   686M  /usr/src
```

Second one with compression on:


```
NAME                      USED  AVAIL  REFER  MOUNTPOINT
zroot/usr/src             352M   220G   352M  /usr/src
```

However in order to get an accurate size you would have to first:

[CMD=""]# chflags -R noschg /usr/obj/usr[/CMD]
[CMD=""]# rm -rf /usr/obj/usr[/CMD]
[CMD=""]# cd /usr/src[/CMD]
[CMD=""]# make cleandir[/CMD]
[CMD=""]# make cleandir[/CMD]

And yes, [cmd=]make cleandir[/cmd] really should be run twice :e


----------

