On Sat, 2019-12-14 at 21:08 +0100, Christopher Gregory via blfs-support wrote: > > > Hello, > > This has got me curious about something. I absolutely hate changing > anything in the kernel unless it is absolutely essential. I > perfected the kernel to my liking and specific to my hardware when I > first started using linuxfromscratch, and only tweaked it when I > moved from a laptop to a desktop. > > That is until recently when I moved everything to use lvm2. I always > used the make oldconfig after copying the config file from /boot into > the new kernel tree and renaming it to .config. But when I moved to > lvm2, I did make (after moving a tweaked config to .config) instead, > and that showed new options and brought up the y/n questions. Is > there any harm in doing this, or have the kernel developers changed > something, or have I just been lucky? > >
In my experience, doing "make oldconfig" when you do not want to change anything is OK, but I think there can be some problems if/when you want to change something. In my example, I certainly had ticked "No" to some "make oldconfig" question at some point, which prevented the xt_LOG module to be built (no problem since I did not need it). But then, I had an old config without the right switch. When I decided to add some support for iptables, if I had taken a default config, this switch would have been automatically ticked, and everything would have been OK. But my old config did not have the switch, and access to it was not even possible (had to tick "Advanced something"). Maybe something close to that was revealed when you moved to lvm2 (although lvm2 should not have any effect on hardware, so I'm still uncertain about what happened in your case). Pierre -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
