On Sat, Dec 27, 2003 at 03:27:48PM -0800, Conrad T. Pino wrote:

> I presume "/sbin/fsck_ffs" is the problem and this implies that:
> 
>    ./build.sh install=/

I'm not sure, but the way I used it before and how I read the help output
from build.sh is: "do a build.sh distribution/release and then a
build.sh install=XXX". But since you seem to have all the files created
on the way during a build, I guess build.sh figured what you wanted and
did all steps in between itself.

> I'm now concerned the userland install failed even though I took
> the ending message as a success.

True - but without a log from build.sh we won't be able to tell.

> May safely assume "/sbin/fsck_ffs" should be replaced with the
> "/usr/src/destdir.i386/sbin/fsck_ffs" (83144) even though it's
> smaller than "/sbin/fsck_ffs" (322988)?

Yes, 83144 looks correct for i386.

> I'm concerned that if "/sbin/fsck_ffs" wasn't updated then what
> else could have been missed.  Any suggestions on how to assure
> the entire userland was updated?

I would use find to check for files of similar age as your current fsck_ffs -
maybe there is a pattern. And you should be able to run "build.sh install=/"
again, this time saving a log of the output and checking for error messages
(if it works ok, there will be only a very short log, like 
"installing set base...")

Martin