Would you recommend to upgrade to 2.2.17 kernel, or it is not necessary?
Currently I have 2.2.14 from Mandrake 7.0 (Dec 99)
Previously, I was expecting to upgrade to 2.4 kernel. Any news on it?
P.S. I usally upgrade with KPackage, clicking on RPM. Will it work in this
case?
On Fri, 18 Aug 2000, Vincent Danen wrote:
> On Fri Aug 18, 2000 at 04:25:38PM +0200, Rial Juan wrote:
> > I used MandrakeUpdate to bring my system up to date, but it warned me
> > that I should upgrade the kernel rpms manually because there was a
> > possible problem with ReiserFS. So I did. Rebooted the computer but it
> > gave me lots of problems, resulting in a kernel panic.
>
> How did you upgrade the kernel. Did you do rpm -Uvh or rpm -ivh?
> Detailed instructions that work (I use them myself many times) are
> available on www.linux-mandrake.com/en/fupdates.php3.
>
> > Now I'm the first to admit that it was pretty stupid of me to upgrade the
> > kernel.rpms; usually I leave those alone, download the latest sources
> > from the net and recompile those according to my needs, adding an extra
> > kernel from which to boot, being the newly compiled test kernel.
>
> Well, no, it's not stupid... it just depends on how you do it. If you
> use rpm -Uvh (for upgrade) you will overwrite the old kernel... that's
> what an "upgrade" does. And, FYI, if that's how we wanted people to
> manually install it, we wouldn't put that warning in MandrakeUpdate
> since that's how MandrakeUpdate "upgrades" packages.. =) FYI, if I do
> rpm -q kernel here I get the following:
>
> kernel-2.2.15-4mdk
> kernel-2.2.17-0.16mdk
>
> I have both packages installed... no overwriting. No problems.
>
> > There is one thing though that I find paricularly short-sighted on behalf
> > of Mandrake: there is one kernel called "failsafe". Well, I don't
> > understand why you make a kernel and label it "failsafe" if you're gonna
> > overwrite it with a new kernel, before it's properly tested. Because that
> > is what happened.
>
> I am betting you used rpm to upgrade the kernel, not install the new
> one (which the instructions tell you to do).
>
> > So for those of you out there that use ReiserFS: stay off the new kernel
> > rpms; recompile your own from the sources, but leave the precompiled ones
> > in place.
>
> Nope, no need to say this. I use ReiserFS and can update my kernels
> happily. My only suggestion is read (and follow) the instructions on
> fupdates.
--
Best Regards,
Vadim Plessky
