Proper File for Update 1.2.3 -> Snapshot Beta 2

EmL

I'd read the sticky Post but it answers not my Question: I'll update my ALIX based pfSense nanobsd installation to Beta 2. Which is the correct file … when i don't know which size the used 1.2.3 image has? Nothing on STATUS/SYSTEM tells me the installed image Size.

On the Snapshot Servers are files like this:

pfSense-2.0-BETA1-512mb-20100404-0948-nanobsd-upgrade.img.gz
pfSense-2.0-BETA1-1g-20100405-1403-nanobsd-upgrade.img.gz
pfSense-2.0-BETA1-2g-20100405-2207-nanobsd-upgrade.img.gz
pfSense-2.0-BETA1-4g-20100404-0537-nanobsd-upgrade.img.gz

Which file should i use?

The http://mypfsense.local/status.php shows me also this information:

df
Filesystem 512-blocks Used Avail Capacity Mounted on
/dev/ufs/pfsense0 906655 166215 667908 20% /
devfs 2 2 0 100% /dev
/dev/md0 78812 8 72500 0% /var/tmp
/dev/md1 118492 10468 98548 10% /var
/dev/ufs/cf 101055 251 92720 0% /cf
devfs 2 2 0 100% /var/dhcpd/dev

Can i assume, that the red value is the size in bytes … which means i have a 1 Gig image ... and have to use the following:

pfSense-2.0-BETA1-1g-20100405-1403-nanobsd-upgrade.img.gz

GruensFroeschli

Try running from
Diagnostic –> Command Prompt:
df -h

This will return the same list as in status.php but in a readable form.

EmL

Thx GruenslFroeschli … now i got this output:

$ df -h
Filesystem Size Used Avail Capacity Mounted on
/dev/ufs/pfsense0 443M 81M 326M 20% /
devfs 1.0K 1.0K 0B 100% /dev
/dev/md0 38M 4.0K 35M 0% /var/tmp
/dev/md1 58M 5.1M 48M 10% /var
/dev/ufs/cf 49M 126K 45M 0% /cf
devfs 1.0K 1.0K 0B 100% /var/dhcpd/dev

Looks like a 512MB image to me. I'll try to use the pfSense-2.0-BETA1-512mb-20100404-0948-nanobsd-upgrade.img.gz file.

Does anybody know the reason, why there are different update files for different image sizes? For the first install it is clear to me cause of the initial write to the cf … but in case of an update? Would it not be easier to deploy only one update file (maybe one for pc and one for embedded) ... or is there a inherent necessity?

wallabybob

Embedded install creates two slices (slice is FreeBSD word for 'partition'), for holding installation files; one effectively acts as a backup. Hence you should probably use a 1GB image.

The system startup output gives the size of a disk. You can use the shell command dmesg to isplay the startup output.

Here's how my system reports a hard drive:

ad0: 955MB <transcend 20071207="">at ata0-master UDMA33</transcend>

If I was installing an embedded kit on this system I'd try the 1GB image.

There are different image sizes to suit different sizes of flash disk. If I recall correctly, one of the pfSense developers aid in another post that it was too hard (or deemed not worth the effort) to make a "one size fits all" image.

EmL

oops … i'd thought i had understood, but you tell me different! Here's what DMESG tells me:

ad0: 1923MB <cf card="" ver2.21="">at ata0-master PIO4</cf>

I think i'd make a mistake now. I updated with a 512 MB image. It's not really worse, cause it's a test environment, and pfsense is running. Under these circumstances it would be the best if pfSense simply shows what imagesize it is installed …

How does it normally works? If i installid with a 1GB image i have to use the 1GB update file. This sounds good for me. But if i dont know the image size ... what is the proper procedure to detect the installed image size to choose the accurate update file accordingly ...

EmL

I found the size of the image here in the GUI: Diagnostics -> NanoBSD

wallabybob

@EmL:

oops … i'd thought i had understood, but you tell me different! Here's what DMESG tells me:

ad0: 1923MB <cf card="" ver2.21="">at ata0-master PIO4</cf>

Your CF card would probably be classified as a 2GB card, in which case you could install a 2GB image, or a 1GB image or a 512MB image, leaving increasing amounts of unused capacity.