Bob Bernstein <poobah%ruptured-duck.com@localhost> writes: > On Sat, 20 Mar 2021, Greg Troxel wrote: > >> boot single user and use /rescue/sh etc. to see what's up in terms >> of having libc from current and 9, and where init is from. > > I tried that, and got something I've never seen before. > > I used the 9.1 CD I made and booted into single-user mode. Then: > > # pwd > # / > # cd lib > # ls -l libc.so.12.* > lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 14 Oct 18 19:24 libc.so.12 -> libc.so.12.213 > -r--r--r 1 root wheel 2079984 Oct 18 19:24 libc.so.12.213 > > That's the part I meant when I said I'd never seen it before, that > '.213' at the end of the library's name That's normal. It's the micro version, udpated on most changes. I advise "ls -l libc.so*" instead. That matches my 9-stables system: lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 14 Feb 21 11:51 libc.so -> libc.so.12.213 lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 14 Feb 21 11:51 libc.so.12 -> libc.so.12.213 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 2100360 Feb 21 11:51 libc.so.12.213 current current on the other hand lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 14 Mar 2 16:12 libc.so -> libc.so.12.218 lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 14 Mar 2 16:12 libc.so.12 -> libc.so.12.218 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 2212320 Mar 2 16:12 libc.so.12.218 >> The other option is to upgrade to current current. [You got a pointer to sets] If what you want is 9, I would advise just doing the upgrade to 9 again with the CD you have. Maybe something odd happened, and once you're mostly there it is possible that less will go wrong. My general approach is to run N-stable on systems where I care on a short-term basis if they work, and I run current on an extra computer, where if it breaks and it takes me a few weeks to fix that's ok. (For some reason people give me old computers that are useful for NetBSD but for little else.) I also build 8/9/current on my main 9 box, using build.sh, which gets me sets and ISO images.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature