Don't upgrade to x86 CE build 2.4.0.r.20171008.0625

Sedorox

See the other thread: https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=137672.msg752884#msg752884

It's been pulled.

jimp

We're working on a fix right now. A change went in that appears to have broken older package binaries (even base system package binaries) with a newer kernel/world. Once we get a new full pkg set built and tested we'll get a fix out.

In the meantime, installing a current snapshot fresh will work since it all matches. Reinstalling and using the "recover config.xml" option will have you back up with less effort than other solutions.

We have taken the broken package sets down so people can't accidentally upgrade to a broken snapshot.

strangegopher

@jimp:

We have taken the broken package sets down so people can't accidentally upgrade to a broken snapshot.

for some reason I am unable to get to the repository after going to previous snapshot. Is there anyway I can quickly install freeradius package so I get wifi working atleast?

doktornotor

The repos are down apparently ATM.

strangegopher

@doktornotor:

The repos are down apparently ATM.

Thanks. Hope packages are back up soon.

Paint

Yes, my pfSense box got hosed as well. I can't complete my restore since the pkg libraries are down.

Can we restore the latest packages that worked for 2.4.0 while the devs fix the package set?

strangegopher

@Paint:

Yes, my pfSense box got hosed as well. I can't complete my restore since the pkg libraries are down.

Can we restore the latest packages that worked for 2.4.0 while the devs fix the package set?

Yes please restore the packages

edit:

it seems they added .BAD to the end of the repos.

https://firmware.netgate.com/pkg/pfSense_factory-v2_4_0_amd64-core.BAD
https://firmware.netgate.com/pkg/pfSense_factory-v2_4_0_amd64-pfSense_factory-v2_4_0.BAD

Can someone test this /usr/local/etc/pkg/repos/pfSense.conf file?


FreeBSD: { enabled: no }

pfSense-core: {
  url: "pkg+https://pkg.pfsense.org/pfSense_v2_4_0_amd64-core.BAD",
  mirror_type: "srv",
  signature_type: "fingerprints",
  fingerprints: "/usr/local/share/pfSense/keys/pkg",
  enabled: yes
}

pfSense: {
  url: "pkg+https://pkg.pfsense.org/pfSense_v2_4_0_amd64-pfSense_v2_4_0.BAD",
  mirror_type: "srv",
  signature_type: "fingerprints",
  fingerprints: "/usr/local/share/pfSense/keys/pkg",
  enabled: yes
}

edit 2: works!

Guest

I think they are marked BAD for a reason ::)

sgw

@marjohn56:

I think they are marked BAD for a reason ::)

I agree ::)

Could that situation also lead to failing package reinstallation after a fresh install?
I did a fresh install of a RC-snapshot from Oct, 3rd or so (just chose a random one, updates later) and restored my backup xml to it.
Currently it is not able to display available packages or install the packages listed in the XML.
No big deal right now, just reporting and asking to learn things.

Guest

Most likely yes.

Best to leave alone until the repo is back up. If you have killed your system then I would rebuild from one of the downloads that are still available. You may not have packages, but at least you'll get a basic working system, however each to their own.

sgw

@marjohn56:

Most likely yes.

Best to leave alone until the repo is back up. If you have killed your system then I would rebuild from one of the downloads that are still available. You may not have packages, but at least you'll get a basic working system, however each to their own.

Box is up and running, no urgent need for the packages. Thanks.

bcruze

i wish i had read this Friday night before i installed this on my sg2220…

i learned quickly how to console into my box which i never had to do before.

really my main complaint is this. i had made a backup under diagnostics > backup and restore > backup and restore a few months ago to an XML file. when i tried to restore it after i put 2.34 p1 back on i received this :

a full configuration restore was selected but a pfsense tag could not be located. what exactly does that mean?

another sad note, i am running the community version on what i believe is an older version of BSD version 10. is that correct?

Guest

On 2.3.4 Yes. 11.0 is 2.4.0 ( or was/is/maybe ) 11.1 is 2.4.1 ( or was/is/maybe ). It's all a bit variable at the moment depending on how you are leaning.

stephenw10

The current release version of pfSense,2.3.4_1, is built on FreeBSD 10.3.

2.4 snapshots were previously built on FreeBSD 11 but moved to 11.1 when we had to delay release to pull in patches for newly discovered issues.

That applies to factory and CE versions.

https://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Versions_of_pfSense_and_FreeBSD

If you upgraded to a bad snap and found the result unusable you have a few choices.

You can wait until we get the repos back up after testing the fix we put in which should be very soon. If your firewall still has WAN connectivity you can upgrade from there.

You can restore a 2.4 snap from Oct6th or earlier but because the repos are down you will not be able to install and packages.

You can restore a 2.3.4 image, the repos for 2.3.4 are unaffected so packages will be installed but any config file you restore must be from 2.3.4 or earlier. If you restore a config from 2.4 you may see that sort of error where 2.3.4 does recognise tags in a 2.4 config file. Not everything has changed though.

Steve

strangegopher

@marjohn56:

I think they are marked BAD for a reason ::)

I plan on fresh install and restore from old config.xml as soon as repos are up.

karlfife

In this next sentence I say Something witty in Klingon about ZFS boot environments in pfSense 2.4+ as a mitigating factor for contingencies such as this:

"ZFS nIvbogh be'vam SUPERBORK SeH 'oH alows SoH ghaH nom RECOVER."

That was one really nice thing about Nano.

stephenw10

@karlfife:

In this next sentence I say Something witty in Klingon …..

Nice. ;D

@strangegopher:

_That is always the safest way. And with the config recovery in 2.4 should be fast.

Internal testing of the new pkgs is looking good.

Steve_

Raul Ramos

@karlfife:

In this next sentence I say Something witty in Klingon about ZFS boot environments in pfSense 2.4+ as a mitigating factor for contingencies such as this:

"ZFS nIvbogh be'vam SUPERBORK SeH 'oH alows SoH ghaH nom RECOVER."

That was one really nice thing about Nano.

Will be a snapshots a thing in pfSense? Wold be great a auto snapshot before upgrade option, maybe. Config recovery do the job beautifully.

karlfife

@mais_um:

Will be a snapshots a thing in pfSense? Wold be great a auto snapshot before upgrade option, maybe. Config recovery do the job beautifully.

It's a ZFS thing, and ZFS is now an install option in pfSense 2.4.

AFAIK, you can't recover from ZFS snapshots in pfSense just yet. I'm not sure where that is on the road-map, but if I were King/President/Jesus, I'd make it a high priority.

I've been anticipating ZFS in pfSense for years and am still giddy when I think about a ZPool vDEV made of 2 flash DOMs. https://twitter.com/karlfife/status/878833005426561024

FreeNAS has been doing GUI-integrated ZFS boot environments for a while, and the feature has saved my bacon more than once (especially in remote installs without remote technical hands). As long as the system comes back up after an update/upgrade, you can pick a boot snapshot (via GUI/SSH–no IPMI needed).

Yes, snapshots are auto-generated at time of update, and (of course) they each contain a private copy of the config (e.g. usable, non-migrated).

karlfife

I just applied the newly available 10/9 build. It seems to have fixed my broken install.

That is, my 2.4 remote instance was non-functional, notably had a DHCP server that wouldn't start, but the borked instance retained WAN connectivity. Just now, it called home to the update servers, which pushed the 10/9 build, then rebooted, bringing the network back to the land of the living. Nice work gentlemen.