Some mirrors still don't have the ISOs. Also remember that all 9.1 packages had to be rebuilt because of the security incident:
As mentioned in the original announcement, a package set uploaded in preparation for the upcoming FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE could not be verified, and so was removed.
Many people want to upgrade just once, following the releases, and then not have to upgrade again a few weeks later. Thanks for the Christmas present, FreeBSD!
The iso's and official release announcement etc are only important really for a first installation. Otherwise I don't see why people care. I just install the latest iso I can get my hands on, which in my case for my latest server install was 9.1-BETA1, and then I upgraded it by getting the source via svn up to 9.1-RC3, and then about two weeks ago up to 9.1-RELEASE after they changed the tag. They haven't made any changes at all to the source code since so I am basically running 9.1-RELEASE. The fact it's not announced is irrelevant. If in the rare event there are any changes made I'll just svn update it again and rebuild whatever has changed. Not too difficult.
I've been running FreeBSD since version 4.1, including a few years running -CURRENT, and have got to know exactly what is safe to run and what I should be aware of. Which means I will always prefer to run a BETA or RC than bother with an older version. Less hassle to do the mergemaster etc. The only reason I'm not running -STABLE is because then I'm tempted to update it on a weekly basis and I can't be bothered doing that any more. -RELEASE keeps me sane!
My only problem was that bsdinstall reported src.txz to have a wrong checksum though the image file FreeBSD-9.1-RELEASE-amd64-memstick.img itself was with the expected checksum.
Should this be reported somewhere? I downloaded the image from the Slovenian mirror site.
Today I installed 9.1-release from .iso file.
Install went fine, but there is not a 9.1-release package system yet. Used the packages-current version which worked for me.
Installed from the 386 iso DVD image today. The operating system installed fine, but post-install sysinstall is claiming that there is no packages/INDEX. Ports for most things is not an option, as I have a very low bandwidth Internet connectuion.
Installed from the 386 iso DVD image today. The operating system installed fine, but post-install sysinstall is claiming that there is no packages/INDEX. Ports for most things is not an option, as I have a very low bandwidth Internet connectuion.
It will be for a short amount of time when the packages on the release discs are not completely out of date.
I recommened keeping a copy of the ports tree and updating it with portsnap(8). It's quite lightweight in terms of network bandwidth after the initial extract that requires a full download of a compressed ports tree. It creates the INDEX file automatically and is probably the next best option short of creating the INDEX yourself with make index.
I'm currently copying the packages directory from dvd to /usr, and also doing a 'make index' in the ports directory. I'll copy the ports INDEX-9 to packages/INDEX and try again. Will report the results.
Does anyone know how to advise the release team that the packages/INDEX file is missing from the release media?
I'm currently copying the packages directory from dvd to /usr, and also doing a 'make index' in the ports directory. I'll copy the ports INDEX-9 to packages/INDEX and try again. Will report the results.
That almost worked. No perl to make the index, so I had to fetch it as per kpa above.
Since /usr/ports/INDEX-9 is a super-set of what's in the packages, I deleted the index entries that didn't have packages to create /usr/packages/INDEX.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
