# Portupgrade claims support has ended.



## ClassicalGeek (Dec 9, 2017)

I have a FreeBSD box with a generic kernel and with five jails. In each jail, and in the host system, `freebsd-version` produces the output

11.1-RELEASE-p6

but in three of the five jails any attempt to run `portupgrade` gives me this:


```
/!\ ERROR: /!\

Ports Collection support for your FreeBSD version has ended, and no ports are
guaranteed to build on this system. Please upgrade to a supported release.

No support will be provided if you silence this message by defining
ALLOW_UNSUPPORTED_SYSTEM.
```

I do not use poudriere jails - I had not heard of them until a few days ago, when I first started searching the fora for an answer, and when the host and jails were still on 11.1-RELEASE-p5.

The host system and two of the jails do not have this problem - yet. But six days ago only one jail was suffering from it.

Can anyone suggest any solutions?


----------



## hedwards (Dec 10, 2017)

ClassicalGeek said:


> I have a FreeBSD box with a generic kernel and with five jails. In each jail, and in the host system, `freebsd-version` produces the output
> 
> 11.1-RELEASE-p6
> 
> ...



I'd be hesitant to upgrade any of the ones that are already working right now and I'd probably leave well enough alone for a bit while the new flavors change gets it's kinks worked out. It's doing the same on mine whether I downgrade back to 11.1 or leave it at 11.1R-p4 which is the newest version that freebsd-update has been showing me.

Mine is doing more or less the same thing. I don't know about your system, but on mine, it seems to reflect a real problem as in the ports tree seems to think that I have older system libraries than I do and refuses to work with them.

If you do press ahead with doing updates, make good and sure that you've got the necessary backups of the system and/or packages of your ports in case you have to undo it.

It's been getting worse and worse and I fear that I may have to do a reinstall because there's so little information out there about what is causing this problem or what to do about it. I assume that there was some sort of change made to how the ports system detects the version because both quarterly and head are doing the same thing.


----------



## SirDice (Dec 11, 2017)

Run `freebsd-version -u` inside the jails. Not the host.


----------



## ClassicalGeek (Dec 11, 2017)

SirDice said:


> Run `freebsd-version -u` inside the jails. Not the host.



I have run `freebsd-version` within the jails, and I also have run `uname` within the host. That gave a version number of 11.1-RELEASE-p4, as I recall, but I seem to remember there being a reason why the `uname` version can sometimes lag behind that from `freebsd-version`. The host was certainly at the latest update version of 11.1-RELEASE, as were the jails.

I had feared that mentioning `uname` in my first post would risk making the situation less clear; unfortunately, not mentioning it appears to have had this effect.


----------



## SirDice (Dec 11, 2017)

A uname(1) show the version of the kernel of the _host_, while you're more interested in the version of the jail(8).


----------



## ClassicalGeek (Dec 11, 2017)

As you quite correctly say, `uname` gives information about the kernel. So, if a patch that has been applied to the host does not affect the kernel, it will also not affect the version that is reported by `uname`. Patch 4 for 11.1 did affect the kernel, patches 5 and 6 did not. Hence from `uname` I get 11.1-RELEASE-p4.

My understanding is that `freebsd-version` gives information about the latest applied patch, whether it is run in a jail or in the host. Thus my output from `freebsd-version` is 11.1-RELEASE-p6, whether run on the host or in the jails, since all have had patch 6 applied.


However, this does not seem to address the problem about which I posted, which is that `portupgrade` reports in some, but not all, of the jails that support has ended for what is actually the latest patched version of 11.1-RELEASE.


----------



## hedwards (Dec 12, 2017)

ClassicalGeek said:


> As you quite correctly say, `uname` gives information about the kernel. So, if a patch that has been applied to the host does not affect the kernel, it will also not affect the version that is reported by `uname`. Patch 4 for 11.1 did affect the kernel, patches 5 and 6 did not. Hence from `uname` I get 11.1-RELEASE-p4.
> 
> My understanding is that `freebsd-version` gives information about the latest applied patch, whether it is run in a jail or in the host. Thus my output from `freebsd-version` is 11.1-RELEASE-p6, whether run on the host or in the jails, since all have had patch 6 applied.
> 
> ...



As far as I can tell the make system is just ignoring the test to decide whether or not to display that message. I see if [ "${INDEX_QUIET}" = "" ]; is supposed to be the determiner of whether or not to display the message, but even if I manually set it to a value in the test, I get the same result. And furthermore, in going through the Makefile, I'm at a loss to figure out where that variable is supposed to be set when the current version is supported. I don't see it mentioned anywhere in any of the files under Mk and it appears only once in the Makefile.


----------

