On Sun 04 Jul 2021 at 23:53:15 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> On Sun 04 Jul 2021 at 21:12:10 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> > On Sun 04 Jul 2021 at 20:16:25 +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
> > > On Sun, 4 Jul 2021 19:42:26 +0100 Brian wrote:
> > > >I did specify "as time goes on". Suppose one boots successfully
On Sun 04 Jul 2021 at 21:12:10 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> On Sun 04 Jul 2021 at 20:16:25 +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
> > On Sun, 4 Jul 2021 19:42:26 +0100 Brian wrote:
> > >I did specify "as time goes on". Suppose one boots successfully a 100
> > >times with the new kernel. What need is there for a
On Sun 04 Jul 2021 at 20:16:25 +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Sun, 4 Jul 2021 19:42:26 +0100
> Brian wrote:
>
> Hello Brian,
>
> >I did specify "as time goes on". Suppose one boots successfully a 100
> >times with the new kernel. What need is there for a second kernel on
> >the system?
>
>
On Sun, 4 Jul 2021 19:42:26 +0100
Brian wrote:
Hello Brian,
>I did specify "as time goes on". Suppose one boots successfully a 100
>times with the new kernel. What need is there for a second kernel on
>the system?
Clearly, you haven't understood what Tixy wrote.
--
Regards _
/ )
On Sun 04 Jul 2021 at 13:45:00 +0100, Tixy wrote:
> On Sun, 2021-07-04 at 10:08 +0100, Brian wrote:
> > On Sat 03 Jul 2021 at 20:49:01 -0600, Tom Dial wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 7/3/21 13:04, Brian wrote:
> > > > On Sat 03 Jul 2021 at 18:49:35 +0100, mick crane wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
On Sat 03 Jul 2021 at 14:20:28 (-0400), Stefan Monnier wrote:
> The only thing with `MODULES=dep` is that it runs a slightly higher risk
> of ending up with an unbootable system after a hardware or
> filesystem/LVM/MD/partition change.
Alternatively, use a little forethought and rebuild initrd
On Sun, 2021-07-04 at 10:08 +0100, Brian wrote:
> On Sat 03 Jul 2021 at 20:49:01 -0600, Tom Dial wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On 7/3/21 13:04, Brian wrote:
> > > On Sat 03 Jul 2021 at 18:49:35 +0100, mick crane wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > Can I not *just* move the older ones out of the way
On Sat 03 Jul 2021 at 20:49:01 -0600, Tom Dial wrote:
>
>
> On 7/3/21 13:04, Brian wrote:
> > On Sat 03 Jul 2021 at 18:49:35 +0100, mick crane wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >> Can I not *just* move the older ones out of the way so upgrade doesn't run
> >> out of space ?
> >
> > Why bother?
> >
On 7/3/21 13:04, Brian wrote:
> On Sat 03 Jul 2021 at 18:49:35 +0100, mick crane wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> Can I not *just* move the older ones out of the way so upgrade doesn't run
>> out of space ?
>
> Why bother?
>
> apt purge linux...
>
> Why do you need two kernels anyway?
I rather
> The only thing with `MODULES=dep` is that it runs a slightly higher risk
> of ending up with an unbootable system after a hardware or
> filesystem/LVM/MD/partition change. Just make sure you have some way to
> do a "rescue boot" in those cases (typically via a USB flash key with some
> minimal
Greg Wooledge [2021-07-03 14:03:44] wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 03, 2021 at 06:49:35PM +0100, mick crane wrote:
>> root@pumpkin:/boot# df -h /boot
>> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
>> /dev/sdb1 236M 159M 65M 71% /boot
> This is the real issue. This file system is simply too
On Sat 03 Jul 2021 at 18:49:35 +0100, mick crane wrote:
[...]
> Can I not *just* move the older ones out of the way so upgrade doesn't run
> out of space ?
Why bother?
apt purge linux...
Why do you need two kernels anyway?
Next time - don't have a separate boot partition. You will be
Hans wrote:
> However, building an own kernel might improve security, i.e. on my
> servers I removed the usbmodule and cdrom stuff, so that no one could
> easy connect evil hardware to the servers (we sometimes got visitors
> in the data processing center)
Or you could just blacklist those
On Sat, Jul 03, 2021 at 06:49:35PM +0100, mick crane wrote:
> root@pumpkin:/boot# df -h /boot
> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> /dev/sdb1 236M 159M 65M 71% /boot
This is the real issue. This file system is simply too small if you
plan to keep more than 2 kernels at a
Am Samstag, 3. Juli 2021, 19:01:02 CEST schrieb IL Ka:
Hi all,
> I was thinking then to remove the unwanted modules to make the kernels
>
> > smaller.
>
Some years ago I tested a few things.
I built a monolithic kernel with all the modules statically built in, as I
knew all modules I needed.
On 2021-07-03 18:12, Greg Wooledge wrote:
On Sat, Jul 03, 2021 at 05:50:44PM +0100, mick crane wrote:
I did think that modules are for the kernel to interact with hardware.
There is for example "dell_smm_hwmon" followed "0" which you'd think
was to
be used by software for monitoring the PC
On 2021-07-03 at 13:28, mick crane wrote:
> On 2021-07-03 18:03, The Wanderer wrote:
>
>>> I looked because "apt upgrade" failed to install things in /boot
>>> because no room left. I deleted the oldest kernel stuff of the 3
>>> there and "apt upgrade" worked.
>>
>> I hope you removed them by
On 2021-07-03 at 13:28, mick crane wrote:
> On 2021-07-03 18:03, The Wanderer wrote:
>
>>> I looked because "apt upgrade" failed to install things in /boot
>>> because no room left. I deleted the oldest kernel stuff of the 3
>>> there and "apt upgrade" worked.
>>
>> I hope you removed them by
On Sat 03 Jul 2021 at 17:50:44 (+0100), mick crane wrote:
> On 2021-07-03 17:29, The Wanderer wrote:
> > On 2021-07-03 at 12:06, mick crane wrote:
> >
> > > hello,
> > > If I type "lsmod" there is a big list of modules with many
> > > followed by a
> > > "0"
> > > which I guess means they are not
On 2021-07-03 18:03, The Wanderer wrote:
I looked because "apt upgrade" failed to install things in /boot
because no room left. I deleted the oldest kernel stuff of the 3
there and "apt upgrade" worked.
I hope you removed them by uninstalling their kernel packages, not by
just deleting the
On Sat, Jul 03, 2021 at 05:50:44PM +0100, mick crane wrote:
> I did think that modules are for the kernel to interact with hardware.
> There is for example "dell_smm_hwmon" followed "0" which you'd think was to
> be used by software for monitoring the PC hardware.
Use modinfo(8) to learn what a
On Sat, Jul 03, 2021 at 05:50:44PM +0100, mick crane wrote:
> I looked because "apt upgrade" failed to install things in /boot
> because no room left. I deleted the oldest kernel stuff of the 3 there
> and "apt upgrade" worked.
Kernel is here:
$ du -sxh /boot/vmlinuz-5.10.0-0.bpo.7-amd64
6.5M
On 2021-07-03 at 12:50, mick crane wrote:
> I did think that modules are for the kernel to interact with
> hardware. There is for example "dell_smm_hwmon" followed "0" which
> you'd think was to be used by software for monitoring the PC
> hardware.
>
> I never used anything like that and
>
>
> There is for example "dell_smm_hwmon" followed "0" which you'd think was
> to be used by software for monitoring the PC hardware.
>
You have this device (SMM BIOS), so ``udev`` loaded this module.
It creates `` /sys/class/hwmon/hwmon..`` for hardware monitoring.
Remove this module, and
On 2021-07-03 17:29, The Wanderer wrote:
On 2021-07-03 at 12:06, mick crane wrote:
hello,
If I type "lsmod" there is a big list of modules with many followed by
a
"0"
which I guess means they are not needed in the kernel ?
That depends what you mean by "needed".
As I understand matters,
On 2021-07-03 at 12:06, mick crane wrote:
> hello,
> If I type "lsmod" there is a big list of modules with many followed by a
> "0"
> which I guess means they are not needed in the kernel ?
That depends what you mean by "needed".
As I understand matters, what that number being nonzero means is
>
>
> hello,
> If I type "lsmod" there is a big list of modules with many followed by a
> "0"
> which I guess means they are not needed in the kernel ?
>
That means no module depends on it.
But it doesn't mean this particular module isn't required.
Does lsmod know about all installed software
Hi.
On Sat, Jul 03, 2021 at 05:06:10PM +0100, mick crane wrote:
> If I type "lsmod" there is a big list of modules with many followed by a "0"
> which I guess means they are not needed in the kernel ?
Third column that lsmod shows is a kernel module reference count.
It can be increased
On Thu, 7 Aug 1997, Joost Kooij wrote:
On Wed, 6 Aug 1997, Johann Spies wrote:
What does dpkg print when it tries to upgrade modutils?
The output of dpkg -i was:
...
/var/lib/dpkg/info/modutils.prerm: /etc/init.d/kerneld: No such file or
directory
...
On Tue, 5 Aug 1997, Joost Kooij wrote:
On Tue, 5 Aug 1997, Johann Spies wrote:
Please excuse me if this has been answered before.
I received my Debian 1.3.1 CD, borrowed a cdrom-drive and installed 1.3.1.
Dselect refuses to remove modules and base and as a result shows
modutils
On Tue, 5 Aug 1997, Johann Spies wrote:
Please excuse me if this has been answered before.
I received my Debian 1.3.1 CD, borrowed a cdrom-drive and installed 1.3.1.
Dselect refuses to remove modules and base and as a result shows
modutils 2.1.35-5 as broken and base 1.1.0-13 as
On Tue, 5 Aug 1997, Joost Kooij wrote:
On Tue, 5 Aug 1997, Johann Spies wrote:
...
I received my Debian 1.3.1 CD, borrowed a cdrom-drive and installed 1.3.1.
Dselect refuses to remove modules and base and as a result shows
modutils 2.1.35-5 as broken and base 1.1.0-13 as obsolete.
On Wed, 6 Aug 1997, Johann Spies wrote:
What does dpkg print when it tries to upgrade modutils?
The output of dpkg -i was:
Preparing to replace modutils 2.1.34-5 (using .../base/modutils_2.1.34-5.deb)
...
/var/lib/dpkg/info/modutils.prerm: /etc/init.d/kerneld: No such file or
33 matches
Mail list logo
