Nanobsd upgrade requires duplicate slice first?



  • I have a SanDisk 1GB CF with pfSense-1.2.3-1g-20091011-1525-nanobsd.img written using physdiskwrite.exe.  It works.  Manual firmware upgrade using pfSense-1.2.3-1g-20091013-1602-nanobsd-upgrade.img.gz (still compressed) from the web GUI fails.

    Diagnostics > NanoBSD > ad0s1 to ad0s2 [Duplicate slice]

    Now manual firmware upgrade works.

    If the duplicate slice is a known requirement, I recommend pre-duplicating the slice in the nanobsd new installation images so the step can be skipped by the user for the first upgrade.  Subsequent upgrades should not matter as long as the slice to be written to is compatible with the upgrade firmware.



  • @rcpao:

    I have a SanDisk 1GB CF with pfSense-1.2.3-1g-20091011-1525-nanobsd.img written using physdiskwrite.exe.  It works.  Manual firmware upgrade using pfSense-1.2.3-1g-20091013-1602-nanobsd-upgrade.img.gz (still compressed) from the web GUI fails.

    Diagnostics > NanoBSD > ad0s1 to ad0s2 [Duplicate slice]

    Now manual firmware upgrade works.

    If the duplicate slice is a known requirement, I recommend pre-duplicating the slice in the nanobsd new installation images so the step can be skipped by the user for the first upgrade.  Subsequent upgrades should not matter as long as the slice to be written to is compatible with the upgrade firmware.

    I've never had to do that, and I've been upgrading nanobsd with snapshots since early August.  To the best of my knowledge, flashing a CF card with a nanobsd image provides the same root file system in both slices.


  • Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate

    @rcpao:

    I recommend pre-duplicating the slice in the nanobsd new installation images so the step can be skipped by the user for the first upgrade.

    This is exactly what is already done on the Nano images. The second slice is merely a duplicate of the first done beforehand.

    I've never had a problem running a nano upgrade, not recently anyhow. Depending on the version you started with, there may have been bugs in the code at that point that didn't allow a working upgrade, so a reflash may have been necessary.


Log in to reply