Bug #3571: Upgrade from 2.1-RELEASE to 2.1.1-RELEASE on NanoBSD/4G/amd64 results in system still being at 2.1-RELEASE - pfSense - pfSense bugtracker

Actions

Copy link

Bug #3571

closed

Upgrade from 2.1-RELEASE to 2.1.1-RELEASE on NanoBSD/4G/amd64 results in system still being at 2.1-RELEASE

Added by Daniel Becker over 10 years ago. Updated over 10 years ago.

Status:

Resolved

Priority:

Normal

Assignee:

Category:

Upgrade

Target version:

Start date:

04/04/2014

Due date:

% Done:

Estimated time:

Plus Target Version:

Release Notes:

Affected Version:

2.1

Affected Architecture:

Description

I've gone through the update wizard in the web interface twice now on my NanoBSD/4G/amd64 system, and I keep ending up with 2.1-RELEASE after the reboot. The download completes, the machine reboots, packages get reinstalled, everything; and yet, after all is said and done, the machine is still at 2.1-RELEASE and showing "update available".

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Daniel Becker over 10 years ago

Looking at http://updates.pfsense.org/_updaters/amd64/ in a browser, I noticed that all the NanoBSD images have a time stamp of 15-Sep-2013, which seems to be in line with my ending up at 2.1-RELEASE...

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Daniel Becker over 10 years ago

Also, for some reason, there appear to be two sets of identically named copies of the hash files for the NanoBSD images, one with time stamp 15-Sep-2013 and one with timestamp 04-Apr-2014.

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Daniel Becker over 10 years ago

Comparing to the listing in http://updates.pfsense.org/_updaters/ (without amd64), I noticed another oddity: The amd64 subdirectory has files of the form "latest-nanobsd-[size]", without an extension, with a 04-Apr-2014 time stamp. These files are at the exact same position in the listing where the .img.gz files are in the i386 directory. Looks like something went wrong with the upload?!

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Chris Buechler over 10 years ago

that's my bad, fixing it right now.

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Chris Buechler over 10 years ago

Status changed from New to Feedback

I'm going through and testing now to fully confirm, but should be ok. If you can also confirm that'd be appreciated.

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Daniel Becker over 10 years ago

"The image file is corrupt. Update cannot continue"

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Daniel Becker over 10 years ago

The file names of the images at http://updates.pfsense.org/_updaters/amd64 still seem to be messed up (missing the .img.gz extension).

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Doktor Notor over 10 years ago

Certainly NOT fixed.

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Daniel Becker over 10 years ago

FWIW, doing a command line upgrade (with ".img.gz" removed from the default URL) seems to have worked fine. It did just skip the hash check step, though, without any user input.

Actions

Copy link

#10