Carlos E. R. wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
>
> The Wednesday 2007-12-05 at 14:37 -0500, Richard Creighton wrote:
>
>
>> Shortly after rebooting, the updater said it had a security patch on the
>> new .13 kernel and (I know, I should know better than to trust anything
>> by now), it was small, a patch and I said, go ahead, it isn't installing
>> a new kernel, just requires a reboot to load it into memory after the
>> update.....Yeah, right!....
>
> Patch or no patch, a kernel patch replaces the whole kernel, even if
> only a small part of it actually changes.
>
I know it replaces the kernel, it has to, but I wasn't expecting it to
REPLACE 2 earlier versions with the patched version which seems to have
the same version number....yup....just checked, the version number did
not change and the patch didn't mention anything about a version change
>> It not only ate my GRUB configuration files
>> and replaced them, it also destroyed (by erasure) all of the other linux
>> kernels in /boot, their syms AND all of the modules AND sources in /lib
>> for those versions!!!!! Dammitalltohellanyway!!!!
>
> All the kernels with different version numbers that the one it was
> replacing? It should only replace the previous kernel, no more. If it
> removes other kernels, open a bugzilla.
>
It erased 2.6.22.12-0.1-bigsmp
2.6.22.9-0.4 bigsmp
and reinstalled
2.6.22.13-0.3-bigsmp (I assumed patched) which was
already online unpatched with that version.
> And, if you say you had compiled your own kernel, that one would not
> be touched - provided you compiled it with a different name.
> Furthermore, once you give the kernel a name (inside the make), the
> /lib/modules/ tree receives also a different name, and that one is not
> replaced:
>
> 1505880 Nov 22 22:21 /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.22.12-0.1-cer <-- mine
> 1559220 Nov 12 04:13 /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.22.12-0.1-cer.old <-- mine, old
> 1593968 Nov 7 17:09 /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.22.12-0.1-default <-- theirs
>
> Only "theirs" is replaced. Plus:
>
I start with a make mrproper but
I am not enough of a kernel expert to answer the thousands of questions
in the .config so I compile using a make O=<my source area> oldconfig
and the only thing I have to do when done is to
make O=<my source area> modules_install install
insmod /lib/modules/`uname -r`/kernel/drivers/scsi/rr174x.ko
depmod
mkinitrd
> /lib/modules/2.6.22.12-0.1-cer/ <=== mine
> /lib/modules/2.6.22.12-0.1-default/
> /lib/modules/2.6.22.12-0.1-debug/
> /lib/modules/2.6.22.12-0.1-xen/
> /lib/modules/2.6.22.12-0.1-xenpae/
>
> Those I have named your kernel, prior to compile, mind! are not
> replaced by Yast. They don't belong to any rpm, thus they are not
> touched.
>
> The sources, yes, that would be lost unless I copied them over. That
> is known.
>
>
> But yes, for something as important as a kernel, it should ask. But I
> think you can go into YOU (never, ever, do an automatic update) and
> select the previous kernel to be maintained - but... no, as it has the
> same rpm name, the option is not given. You can't.
>
For many weeks, going on months, I studiously ignored the red triangle
of the updater. I weakened this one time. I will NEVER trust the
updater again. All updates had been done via the YAST online update
where I had some control over what and when. Kinda defeats the purpose
of the automatic updater, doesn't it? I have filed bugreports until I
am tired of being ignored.
One nice thing about being a retired college professor after retiring
from being a programmer for many years, is that I now have a lot of time
to annoy Novel senior managment by trying to write lucid letters to them
in the hopes that writing business case (read dollars and cents) reasons
why it is to their interests to pay attention to these little details.
I live and breathe Linux, love SuSE and invoke Gates' name in vain as
often as I can, but when stuff like this happens due to poor management
decisions being made, Linux, SuSE and Novell (where the money comes
from) all suffer in the long run. We want the 'unwashed masses' that
currently run MS to come and try out SuSE and abandon monopolistic
offerings of Gates and Co., but when stuff like this is allowed to
fester unchallenged, it is really unlikely that openSuSE, et al., we
ever make that much of an impact on those we want most to switch. If
you have to be an ex college professor that taught OS theory in order to
have a chance to succeed with openSuSE, what chance does the average
Windoze schmuck have at success? Only by great luck will he have any.
Cheers back atcha
Richard
> - -- Cheers,
> Carlos E. R.
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.4-svn0 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFHVwLvtTMYHG2NR9URAr6jAJ9hpzL0ZGxPsUSpk3AmoDCH/yYoMwCgkYG7
> 0K09hp35c8RTelJ/ErbTWk0=
> =4Xya
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
