4 ms·
The confusion might be around the term "patch". These can be sometimes be simple diff patches. Or they can be multi-step processes, including reboots, all wra
by breput 6y ago
The confusion might be around the term "patch". These can be sometimes be simple diff patches. Or they can be multi-step processes, including reboots, all wrapped up into a single "patch".
For example: https://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Distributions/UCB/2.11BSD/Patches/467 https://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Distributions/UCB/2.11BSD/Patch...
I recently updated from patch level 462 to 469 (the most recently patch available) and even with excellent documentation, it was an involved process. If you look all the way back to the first set of patches (https://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Distributions/UCB/2.11BSD/Patches/001-009.tar.bz2 https://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Distributions/UCB/2.11BSD/Patch...) there isn't even documentation for the most part. Some diffs, some random tar files, and some "Remove everything above the #! /bin/sh line." patches.
- progman32 6y agoAh. I understand the difficulty now, thanks. Some patches might not even apply in reverse!
- bsdimp 6y agoIt's hard to reverse apply 'rm /usr/src/bin/ld.c' in the instructions to patch 160, for example. You have to reconstruct ld.c from 2.10.1BSD, and then add missing changes to get it to work...
- qubex 6y agoExactly: deletions is what came to my mind instantly and if you hadn’t raised the issue then I would have.