Re: [Cooker] kernels and urpmi/Mandrakeupdate
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For 9.1 I noticed that many people are still running 0.13mdk, not because they do not want to update but because they do not know that there is an update (it didn't show up in mdkupdate). Is there any good reason to keep this behaviour for 9.2? A kernel update requires a reboot I know, and not all people want to do it immediatly, but the update program could at least suggest it, you do not have to select it anyways. IMHO, this can only be considered in if /sbin/installkernel (or whatever replaces it) ensures that on the first kernel update, an entry for the original kernel is retained. Otherwise, automatic kernel update plus unintentional reboot (ie power failure) = unhappy user/administrator (as would happen at present). Regards, Buchan -- |Registered Linux User #182071-| Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone * Work+27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x121 Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7 ** Please click on http://www.cae.co.za/disclaimer.htm to read our e-mail disclaimer or send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a copy. **
Re: [Cooker] kernels and urpmi/Mandrakeupdate
Le sam 26/07/2003 à 17:45, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : For 9.1 I noticed that many people are still running 0.13mdk, not because they do not want to update but because they do not know that there is an update (it didn't show up in mdkupdate). Is there any good reason to keep this behaviour for 9.2? A kernel update requires a reboot I know, and not all people want to do it immediatly, but the update program could at least suggest it, you do not have to select it anyways. d. I would even say that even if the kernel is downloaded, it is not installed by default, you must install it by hand, which is tricky ! Two times i have had to go in rpmdrake, and install the new kernel by selecting it ... After a while i rebooted (power failure) and found in the situation Buchan experienced : X wasn't starting due to the lack of nvidia's driver ... A 5 minutes workaround made it work but is it the behaviour one wants to use ? Stef -- Teletchéa Stéphane [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [Cooker] kernels and urpmi/Mandrakeupdate
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003, Buchan Milne wrote: IMHO, this can only be considered in if /sbin/installkernel (or whatever replaces it) ensures that on the first kernel update, an entry for the original kernel is retained. Otherwise, automatic kernel update plus unintentional reboot (ie power failure) = unhappy user/administrator (as would happen at present). installkernel is a bit broken anyways (has problems with kernel-mm and kernel-benh (see cooker-ppc)), I will see if i can make it a bit more robust. d.
Re: [Cooker] kernels and urpmi/Mandrakeupdate
IMHO, this can only be considered in if /sbin/installkernel (or whatever replaces it) ensures that on the first kernel update, an entry for the original kernel is retained. Otherwise, automatic kernel update plus unintentional reboot (ie power failure) = unhappy user/administrator (as would happen at present). last time I asked Chmouel said he had some problems doing it. I do not know more details installkernel is a bit broken anyways (has problems with kernel-mm and kernel-benh (see cooker-ppc)), I will see if i can make it a bit more robust good, that is really needed. current behaviour is broken - you get two entries for new kernel and none for the old. if you also make it run lilo/grub when updating existing kernel - even better. Currently when I recompile kernel and reinstall it I have to run lilo manually (lilo entry already exists). Not a big deal for normal users probably.
Re: [Cooker] kernels and urpmi/Mandrakeupdate
On Sat Jul 26 23:43 +0400, Andrey Borzenkov wrote: if you also make it run lilo/grub when updating existing kernel - even better. Currently when I recompile kernel and reinstall it I have to run lilo manually (lilo entry already exists). Not a big deal for normal users probably. AFAIK, grub does not require re-running... -- Levi Ramsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Take due notice and govern yourselves accordingly. Currently playing: %s Linux 2.4.21-3mdk 22:12:00 up 59 min, 6 users, load average: 0.02, 0.07, 0.06
