James Sparenberg wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-07-31 at 08:15, Felix Miata wrote:
> > Finally got around to my first 9.1 install last night, and I'm
> > personalizing configuration now. I did clean install using existing
> > /home rather than updating 9.0, as I never did figure out how to make
> > 9.0 boot in under 4 minutes, and didn't want whatever was wrong to cause
> > that to survive the upgrade.
> > This is the first install I've done where doing the updates at the end
> > offered a new kernel. I checked that yes. When done, I found that the
> > new kernel 2.4.21-0.25 became an alternate choice in the Grub menu
> > instead of replacing 2.4.21-0.13 as the default. Is there any reason I
> > shouldn't want 0.25 to be the default?
> not if it's working right for you. My understanding is that it's done
> this way to allow choice, not force it. I'm running my own build of
> 25mdk here without a hitch.
Actually, 25 is what I'm running. I wrote too soon. After taking a
second look at the old and new /boot/grub/menu.lst files, and the
contents of /boot, I see /boot/vmlinuz is linked to 25 rather than 13.
What threw me was /boot/grub/menu.lst had an added entry:
title 2421-25
>kernel (hd0,4)/vmlinuz-2.4.21-0.25mdk initrd=hd.rdz ramdisk_size=128000
>automatic=method:disk acpi=off vga=785 root=/dev/ram3
initrd (hd0,4)/initrd-2.4.21-0.25mdk.img
I have no idea why that's there other than as red herring duty. Is it
some alternate form of rescue boot?
--
"Do not let the sun go down while you are still angry."
Ephesians 4:26 NIV
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
