Bug 213564 - [handbook] [patch] clarify Updating FreeBSD chapter to contrast binary-only and source-based upgrade strategies
Summary: [handbook] [patch] clarify Updating FreeBSD chapter to contrast binary-only a...
Status: New
Alias: None
Product: Documentation
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Documentation (show other bugs)
Version: Latest
Hardware: Any Any
: --- Affects Many People
Assignee: freebsd-doc (Nobody)
Keywords: patch
Depends on:
Reported: 2016-10-17 13:31 UTC by Mark Linimon
Modified: 2018-12-23 21:51 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:

patch to handbook/cutting_edge (6.47 KB, patch)
2016-10-17 13:31 UTC, Mark Linimon
no flags Details | Diff

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Mark Linimon freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2016-10-17 13:31:13 UTC
Created attachment 175861 [details]
patch to handbook/cutting_edge

Currently Chapter 23 mixes these two types of content.  This may be confusing to new users.

In particular, I see recurring questions on the mailing lists about problems using freebsd-update in situations where it is may not be the best strategy.

A new Section is introduced, "Choosing a Strategy", which clearly shows what part of the remaining chapter content is relevant to which strategy.  This is introduced right after the Synopsis.

The Synopsis grows a reference to this section.  In addition, one excellent line is pulled from the top of the FreeBSD Update section and moved the top here.  There is some minor rewording to go with that.

A disclaimer is added to the FreeBSD Update section about which architectures it is available for.  This is a hack; that information should be provided elsewhere.  Right now the information is correct but misleading.

Finally, a minor change to the last section attempts to clarify that it is applicable to source updates and only in certain environments.
Comment 1 Chris Rees freebsd_committer 2018-12-23 21:51:34 UTC
I think this adds some useful context for how to choose-- it's exactly what I would have been after with this question.