[gentoo-user] Re: Slightly corrupted file systems when resuming from hibernation
On 2024-04-16, Dr Rainer Woitok wrote: > Arve, > > On Tuesday, 2024-04-16 15:53:48 +0200, you wrote: > >> ... >> Only LTS kernels get stabilised, so this information is readily available. > > I'm sure I don't understand this: According to "https://www.kernel.org/; > kernel 6.6.27 is "longterm", but according to "eix" the most recent > 6.6.* kernels are 6.6.22 and 6.6.23 which both are non-stable (well, I > ran my last "sync" immediately before the profile upgrade, so this might > not be current). I'm still using stable kernel 6.6.13 as my backup ker- > nel, but this kernel is no longer provided by Gentoo. So, what precise- > ly does LTS or "longterm" mean? That means that all gentoo-sources stable kernels are "longterm" kernel versions on kernel.org. It does not mean that all "longterm" kernel versions from kernel.org are available as "stable" in gentoo-sources. It is a statement that "gentoo-sources stable" is a subset of "kernel.org longterm". It is not a statement that the two sets are identical. In other words: "ONLY LTS kernels get stabilized." is a different statement from "ALL LTS kernels get stabilized." The former is true. The latter is not. > But, to get back to the beginning of this discussion: if there is a > risk that my aging hardware possibly can less and less cope with > newer and newer kernels, should I put something like > >>=sys-kernel/gentoo-sources-6.7.0 > > into file "package.mask" to stay with "longterm" 6.6.* kernels? Yes: if you want to avoid getting upgraded to 6.8 when it gets kernel.org "longterm" status and gentoo-sources "stable" status, then a statement like that in in package.mask will keep you on gentoo-sources 6.6 kernels (which are "longterm" on kernel.org). Again: not all longterm 6.6.x kernel versions get marked as "stable" for gentoo-sources. If you have not enabled the testing keyword for gentoo-sources, then you'll only get the 6.6.x kernel versions that the gentoo-sources maintainers have declared as "stable". -- Grant
[gentoo-user] Re: Slightly corrupted file systems when resuming from hibernation
Arve, On Tuesday, 2024-04-16 15:53:48 +0200, you wrote: > ... > Only LTS kernels get stabilised, so this information is readily available. I'm sure I don't understand this: According to "https://www.kernel.org/; kernel 6.6.27 is "longterm", but according to "eix" the most recent 6.6.* kernels are 6.6.22 and 6.6.23 which both are non-stable (well, I ran my last "sync" immediately before the profile upgrade, so this might not be current). I'm still using stable kernel 6.6.13 as my backup ker- nel, but this kernel is no longer provided by Gentoo. So, what precise- ly does LTS or "longterm" mean? But, to get back to the beginning of this discussion: if there is a risk that my aging hardware possibly can less and less cope with newer and newer kernels, should I put something like >=sys-kernel/gentoo-sources-6.7.0 into file "package.mask" to stay with "longterm" 6.6.* kernels? Sincerely, Rainer
Re: [gentoo-user] Using the new binpkgs
On April 16, 2024 10:44:55 AM EDT, Peter Humphrey wrote: > >This is what I get after this morning's update: > > >Dependency resolution took 16.03 s (backtrack: 0/20). > >[ebuild N ] gui-libs/gtk-4.12.5:4::gentoo USE="X cups gstreamer >introspection wayland (-aqua) -broadway -cloudproviders -colord -examples (- >ffmpeg) -sysprof -test (-vulkan)" CPU_FLAGS_X86="f16c" 16,909 KiB >[binary NS] net-libs/libsoup-3.4.4-2:3.0::gentoo [2.74.3:2.4::gentoo] >USE="brotli* introspection ssl vala -gssapi -gtk-doc -samba -sysprof -test" >ABI_X86="(64) -32 (-x32)" 390 KiB >[ebuild NS] net-libs/webkit-gtk-2.42.5-r600:6/0::gentoo >[2.42.5:4/37::gentoo] USE="X gstreamer introspection jpeg2k jumbo-build lcms >pdf (seccomp) spell wayland (-aqua) -avif -examples -gamepad -jpegxl -keyring >-systemd" 0 KiB > >Total: 3 packages (1 new, 2 in new slots, 1 binary), Size of downloads: 17,299 >KiB > >!!! The following binary packages have been ignored due to non matching USE: > >=gui-libs/gtk-4.12.5 colord -cpu_flags_x86_f16c sysprof >=gui-libs/gtk-4.12.5 -cpu_flags_x86_f16c -gstreamer > > >Notice that there's no mention of non-matching USE in webkit-gtk. And, re >gtk-4.12.5, why do the USE flags not match the default in the profile? And >what >on earth is 'cpu_flags_x86_f16c'? And why does gtk get two different lines for >the same package? CPU_FLAGS_X86 is probably in your make.conf. It is an expanded USE and not typically set per package. Two different lines for the same package is because there are two different sets of USE flags available on the binhost. Because the binhost compiles it on two different builders with different USE flags. (There is a server profile, a gnome profile, and a KDE profile.) webkit-gtk isn't mentioned at all, because the binhost doesn't have a binary package for SLOT="2.42.5". Is there a reason you expected it would be? The binhost has many packages, and lacks many packages. The ones it has tend to be popular leaf applications and their dependencies. The package you're trying to install is a library framework -- perhaps none of the binhost packages depend on that specific SLOT for webkit-gtk. >What's more, neither gtk nor libsoup was mentioned this morning, and I haven't >sync'd in the interim. Why should they have been mentioned, if they are only needed (marked as "New", not updated) because you're trying to install webkit-gtk from scratch? >You see why I'm mystified - unless I've messed up my scripts, of course. > > Does your emerge command include --getbinpkg, or -g? > >Of course; I /am/ doing my best to follow the instructions verbatim. > -- Eli Schwartz
[gentoo-user] Re: Slightly corrupted file systems when resuming from hibernation
On 2024-04-16, Dale wrote: > I've never understood what is supported long term either. I use > gentoo-sources. I've never figured out just how to pick a kernel that > is supposed to be stable for the larger version. In other words, only > security and bug fixes, no new hardware. Right now, 6.8.5 is the > highest version in the tree here but there are more versions of it to > come. So, I tend to go back to 6.7.X and pick the highest version of > that. The first two digits used to mean something but I think that > changed a long time ago. Any gentoo-soruces ebuild that's "stable" is an upstream LTS kernel. The 6.8 version of gentoo-sources are all "testing". They're "stable" on kernel.org, but theyre _not_ LTS. I think I read that 6.8 is expected to become the next LTS, but I don't really pay attention. > I try to avoid the absolute latest because my video drivers tend to lag > behind a little. They won't emerge for anything very new sometimes. > That's why I go back a little as described above. Thing is, I have no > idea if that is the right way or if it really even matters if I pick > 6.8.1 over 6.7.12 or vice versa. Neither are stable in Gentoo. Neither are longterm on kernel.org. 6.8 is stable on kernel.org. 6.7 is EOL on kernel.org. I would only choose 6.7 as a last resort. I would only choose 6.8 if the latest longterm (6.6) won't work. > I wish they were clearly marked somehow myself. Something in the name > that shows it is stable. Given I rarely have problems with kernels, > maybe none of this matters. Thing is, I plan to build a new rig soon. > Might help then. Maybe. Look at https://packages.gentoo.org/packages/sys-kernel/gentoo-sources The ones in green are the kernel.org "longterm" supported kernel versions that are stable in Gentoo. Here you can see which ones are lonterm, stable, mainline, and EOL upstream: https://kernel.org/ I would never run something that's not longterm unless there's a specific reason you have to choose something else. If you have to pick something that's not longterm, go with "stable" and not EOL if you can.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Slightly corrupted file systems when resuming from hibernation
Grant Edwards wrote: > On 2024-04-16, Arve Barsnes wrote: >> On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 at 15:29, Dr Rainer Woitok >> wrote: My understanding is the gentoo-sources kernels are aligned with the LTS upstream releases. >>> Right, they use the same version numbers. But you can't see from just >>> looking at the available "gentoo-sources" which one is LTS and which one >>> is not. You have to consult "https://www.kernel.org/; to get this in- >>> formation. >> Only LTS kernels get stabilised, so this information is readily available. > "Stablized" as in the corresponding gentoo-sources ebuild is marked as > stable. [Not to be confused with Linux "stable" kernels -- not all of > which end up with LTS status.] > > Getnoo-sources also includes "stable" but not "LTS" Linux kernels, but > the gentoo-sources ebuild for those is always "testing". > > IOW, if you install gentoo-sources, and don't keyword it to allow > "testing" ebuilds, then you won't get anything other than LTS kernel > sources. That's some helpful info. That helps me too. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Slightly corrupted file systems when resuming from hibernation
Arve Barsnes wrote: > On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 at 15:29, Dr Rainer Woitok > wrote: >>> My understanding is the gentoo-sources kernels are aligned with the LTS >>> upstream releases. >> Right, they use the same version numbers. But you can't see from just >> looking at the available "gentoo-sources" which one is LTS and which one >> is not. You have to consult "https://www.kernel.org/; to get this in- >> formation. > Only LTS kernels get stabilised, so this information is readily available. > > Regards, > Arve I've never understood what is supported long term either. I use gentoo-sources. I've never figured out just how to pick a kernel that is supposed to be stable for the larger version. In other words, only security and bug fixes, no new hardware. Right now, 6.8.5 is the highest version in the tree here but there are more versions of it to come. So, I tend to go back to 6.7.X and pick the highest version of that. The first two digits used to mean something but I think that changed a long time ago. I try to avoid the absolute latest because my video drivers tend to lag behind a little. They won't emerge for anything very new sometimes. That's why I go back a little as described above. Thing is, I have no idea if that is the right way or if it really even matters if I pick 6.8.1 over 6.7.12 or vice versa. I wish they were clearly marked somehow myself. Something in the name that shows it is stable. Given I rarely have problems with kernels, maybe none of this matters. Thing is, I plan to build a new rig soon. Might help then. Maybe. Dale :-) :-)
[gentoo-user] Re: Slightly corrupted file systems when resuming from hibernation
On 2024-04-16, Arve Barsnes wrote: > On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 at 15:29, Dr Rainer Woitok > wrote: >> > My understanding is the gentoo-sources kernels are aligned with the LTS >> > upstream releases. >> >> Right, they use the same version numbers. But you can't see from just >> looking at the available "gentoo-sources" which one is LTS and which one >> is not. You have to consult "https://www.kernel.org/; to get this in- >> formation. > > Only LTS kernels get stabilised, so this information is readily available. "Stablized" as in the corresponding gentoo-sources ebuild is marked as stable. [Not to be confused with Linux "stable" kernels -- not all of which end up with LTS status.] Getnoo-sources also includes "stable" but not "LTS" Linux kernels, but the gentoo-sources ebuild for those is always "testing". IOW, if you install gentoo-sources, and don't keyword it to allow "testing" ebuilds, then you won't get anything other than LTS kernel sources.
Re: [gentoo-user] Using the new binpkgs
(Rearranged in chronological order...) On Tuesday, 16 April 2024 15:08:33 BST Waldo Lemmer wrote: > On Tue, Apr 16, 2024, 15:43 Peter Humphrey wrote: > > On Monday, 15 April 2024 12:19:02 BST Peter Humphrey wrote: --->8 > > I'm still mystified by these Gentoo binary packages. I assume that they're > > generated using the default USE flags in the profile version (whence the > > need to specify it in gentoobinhost.conf). > > > > So why is portage not fetching webkit-gtk from the repo? I've just had to > > compile it from source, even though nothing in /etc/portage/ refers to it > > (except for wxGTK depending on it). Therefore I assume i meet the > > conditions > > for using the binpkg, but apparently not. > > > > Clues, anyone? > > If you add --ask --verbose, Portage should tell you why it's falling back > to the source package. This is what I get after this morning's update: Dependency resolution took 16.03 s (backtrack: 0/20). [ebuild N ] gui-libs/gtk-4.12.5:4::gentoo USE="X cups gstreamer introspection wayland (-aqua) -broadway -cloudproviders -colord -examples (- ffmpeg) -sysprof -test (-vulkan)" CPU_FLAGS_X86="f16c" 16,909 KiB [binary NS] net-libs/libsoup-3.4.4-2:3.0::gentoo [2.74.3:2.4::gentoo] USE="brotli* introspection ssl vala -gssapi -gtk-doc -samba -sysprof -test" ABI_X86="(64) -32 (-x32)" 390 KiB [ebuild NS] net-libs/webkit-gtk-2.42.5-r600:6/0::gentoo [2.42.5:4/37::gentoo] USE="X gstreamer introspection jpeg2k jumbo-build lcms pdf (seccomp) spell wayland (-aqua) -avif -examples -gamepad -jpegxl -keyring -systemd" 0 KiB Total: 3 packages (1 new, 2 in new slots, 1 binary), Size of downloads: 17,299 KiB !!! The following binary packages have been ignored due to non matching USE: =gui-libs/gtk-4.12.5 colord -cpu_flags_x86_f16c sysprof =gui-libs/gtk-4.12.5 -cpu_flags_x86_f16c -gstreamer Notice that there's no mention of non-matching USE in webkit-gtk. And, re gtk-4.12.5, why do the USE flags not match the default in the profile? And what on earth is 'cpu_flags_x86_f16c'? And why does gtk get two different lines for the same package? What's more, neither gtk nor libsoup was mentioned this morning, and I haven't sync'd in the interim. You see why I'm mystified - unless I've messed up my scripts, of course. > Does your emerge command include --getbinpkg, or -g? Of course; I /am/ doing my best to follow the instructions verbatim. -- Regards, Peter.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Slightly corrupted file systems when resuming from hibernation
On 4/16/24 7:15 AM, Michael wrote: On Tuesday, 16 April 2024 11:55:20 BST Dale wrote: If you update often, it shouldn't take long answer the questions. If you do like me and don't update often, it may take longer but no more time than it would if you updated often and added all the time together. As far as I know, if one manually updates their kernel, make oldconfig is the safest and recommended method. You are prompted for new drivers/options and can see if they apply to you or not. If you don't want to update that way, I think there is a kernel that does it's own thing. I think it is sort of like boot media uses. If the time needed to answer all the questions isn't there, that may be a option to look into. It's called genkernel. I've never used it but read it works. The sys-kernel/genkernel package will automatically build & install your kernel and initramfs in /boot, but it will NOT prepare a kernel configuration tuned to your hardware and desired options. It uses a generic default configuration safe for most circumstances. The user can tweak the default configuration to suit their needs and genkernel will use that. I manually run make xconfig (after running make olddefconfig) and have genkernel set to not use it's default config, sticking to the .config in the kernel tree (/usr/src/linux.) That's been working fine for me for many years.
Re: [gentoo-user] Using the new binpkgs
If you add --ask --verbose, Portage should tell you why it's falling back to the source package. Does your emerge command include --getbinpkg, or -g? On Tue, Apr 16, 2024, 15:43 Peter Humphrey wrote: > On Monday, 15 April 2024 12:19:02 BST Peter Humphrey wrote: > > Hello list, > > [Big snip] > > I'm still mystified by these Gentoo binary packages. I assume that they're > generated using the default USE flags in the profile version (whence the > need to > specify it in gentoobinhost.conf). > > So why is portage not fetching webkit-gtk from the repo? I've just had to > compile it from source, even though nothing in /etc/portage/ refers to it > (except for wxGTK depending on it). Therefore I assume i meet the > conditions > for using the binpkg, but apparently not. > > Clues, anyone? > > -- > Regards, > Peter. > > > > >
Re: [gentoo-user] Using the new binpkgs
On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 at 15:43, Peter Humphrey wrote: > I'm still mystified by these Gentoo binary packages. I assume that they're > generated using the default USE flags in the profile version (whence the need > to > specify it in gentoobinhost.conf). > > So why is portage not fetching webkit-gtk from the repo? I've just had to > compile it from source, even though nothing in /etc/portage/ refers to it > (except for wxGTK depending on it). Therefore I assume i meet the conditions > for using the binpkg, but apparently not. A variety of USE combinations are built, but it needs to match your case. Check your binhost mirror to see which combinations exist, for instance at https://ftp.lysator.liu.se/gentoo/releases/amd64/binpackages/23.0/x86-64/Packages Search for 'CPV: net-libs/webkit-gtk' and check the USE line for the matching package versions you're wondering about. Regards, Arve
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Slightly corrupted file systems when resuming from hibernation
On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 at 15:29, Dr Rainer Woitok wrote: > > My understanding is the gentoo-sources kernels are aligned with the LTS > > upstream releases. > > Right, they use the same version numbers. But you can't see from just > looking at the available "gentoo-sources" which one is LTS and which one > is not. You have to consult "https://www.kernel.org/; to get this in- > formation. Only LTS kernels get stabilised, so this information is readily available. Regards, Arve
Re: [gentoo-user] Using the new binpkgs
On Monday, 15 April 2024 12:19:02 BST Peter Humphrey wrote: Hello list, [Big snip] I'm still mystified by these Gentoo binary packages. I assume that they're generated using the default USE flags in the profile version (whence the need to specify it in gentoobinhost.conf). So why is portage not fetching webkit-gtk from the repo? I've just had to compile it from source, even though nothing in /etc/portage/ refers to it (except for wxGTK depending on it). Therefore I assume i meet the conditions for using the binpkg, but apparently not. Clues, anyone? -- Regards, Peter.
[gentoo-user] Re: Slightly corrupted file systems when resuming from hibernation
Michael, On Tuesday, 2024-04-16 11:15:07 +0100, you wrote: > ... > > But this brings up two related questions: > > > > 1. Why does Gentoo not somehow mark LTS kernels either in the version > >number or in the slot name? This would make it easier to prevent the > >installation of too modern kernels. > > My understanding is the gentoo-sources kernels are aligned with the LTS > upstream releases. Right, they use the same version numbers. But you can't see from just looking at the available "gentoo-sources" which one is LTS and which one is not. You have to consult "https://www.kernel.org/; to get this in- formation. > ... > The make oldconfig script will identify new config items not present in your > old kernel config, show which is the default option and ask you to > interactively select which one you prefer; e.g. > > SPECULATION_MITIGATIONS [Y/n/m/?] (NEW) > > The default option above has been identified as Y, if the devs have > determined > this is a safe default for the arch. You can hit Enter to select Y, or type > 'n' for no, 'm' for module, or '?' to read the extended description and help > for this option before you make up your mind. Bingo! This is exactly the information I somehow wasn't able to find in my early Gentoo days! You made my day :-) Sincerely, Rainer
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Slightly corrupted file systems when resuming from hibernation
Michael wrote: > On Tuesday, 16 April 2024 11:55:20 BST Dale wrote: > >> If you update often, it shouldn't take long answer the questions. If >> you do like me and don't update often, it may take longer but no more >> time than it would if you updated often and added all the time >> together. As far as I know, if one manually updates their kernel, make >> oldconfig is the safest and recommended method. You are prompted for >> new drivers/options and can see if they apply to you or not. If you >> don't want to update that way, I think there is a kernel that does it's >> own thing. I think it is sort of like boot media uses. If the time >> needed to answer all the questions isn't there, that may be a option to >> look into. It's called genkernel. I've never used it but read it works. > The sys-kernel/genkernel package will automatically build & install your > kernel and initramfs in /boot, but it will NOT prepare a kernel configuration > tuned to your hardware and desired options. It uses a generic default > configuration safe for most circumstances. The user can tweak the default > configuration to suit their needs and genkernel will use that. > > For quick(er) and automated kernel update and installation there are the > gentoo *distribution kernels*: > > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Distribution_Kernel > > > I thought genkernel was the one. Looking at your link, that would be a option more closely to what I thought genkernel was. So, genkernel requires more effort than I thought and distribution kernel is the more "automatic" way. Now to remember that. :/ I still like my old way. It works. It's rare that it fails. It's been years since I couldn't boot up due to a bad kernel. Still good to have options tho. Not everyone is like me. Thank goodness for that. ROFL Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Slightly corrupted file systems when resuming from hibernation
On Tuesday, 16 April 2024 11:55:20 BST Dale wrote: > If you update often, it shouldn't take long answer the questions. If > you do like me and don't update often, it may take longer but no more > time than it would if you updated often and added all the time > together. As far as I know, if one manually updates their kernel, make > oldconfig is the safest and recommended method. You are prompted for > new drivers/options and can see if they apply to you or not. If you > don't want to update that way, I think there is a kernel that does it's > own thing. I think it is sort of like boot media uses. If the time > needed to answer all the questions isn't there, that may be a option to > look into. It's called genkernel. I've never used it but read it works. The sys-kernel/genkernel package will automatically build & install your kernel and initramfs in /boot, but it will NOT prepare a kernel configuration tuned to your hardware and desired options. It uses a generic default configuration safe for most circumstances. The user can tweak the default configuration to suit their needs and genkernel will use that. For quick(er) and automated kernel update and installation there are the gentoo *distribution kernels*: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Distribution_Kernel > In short, make oldconfig is the recommended way as far as I know. In my > opinion, it is the safest way to know what you are going to get. Links > for more info. > > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Kernel/Upgrade > > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Kernel/Configuration > > Someone else may have a different opinion, even a better one. This is > how I always do it and kernel failure is rare. Hope it helps. > > Dale > > :-) :-) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Slightly corrupted file systems when resuming from hibernation
Dr Rainer Woitok wrote: > Michael, > > On Monday, 2024-04-15 12:48:34 +0100, you wrote: > >> ... >> Why have you set your /boot to be mounted at boot? > Well, I think, I then just followed the Gentoo Handbook. But I see your > point of saving time which could be better used to successfully unmount > the "/home/" partition. I'll change my "/etc/fstab" file as well as a > few of my scripts. Thanks for pointing that out :-) > >> ... >> MoBo firmware can be notoriously buggy and is >> typically frozen/abandoned within a couple of years by the OEMs. In >> addition, >> kernel code changes and any previous symbiosis with the firmware can fall >> apart with a later kernel release. > Hm, this sounds a bit like "never change your running kernel", doesn't > it? But this brings up two related questions: > > 1. Why does Gentoo not somehow mark LTS kernels either in the version >number or in the slot name? This would make it easier to prevent the >installation of too modern kernels. > > 2. I'm building new kernels with "make olddefconfig" rather than "make >oldconfig" because I thought providing default values to new configu- >ration variables is a good idea. But what precisely does "make old- >config" do with new configuration variables instead? Just leaving >them out? But what's the difference between not defining a configu- >ration variable and setting it to a default value? Or is "make old- >config" really the way to generate more conservative kernels which do >not as quickly overburden aging motherboards? > > Sincerely, > Rainer I rarely update my kernel given I don't reboot much. I am working on that tho. I've updated my kernel three times recently but never rebooted to use any of them. If power fails and I have to reboot, they are there at least. All of us should update when we can. I been using Gentoo since around 2003. I started out making my kernel from scratch and updating the manual way. I also install the manual way with my own naming scheme, just close enough for dracut and grub to recognize them. I've always used make oldconfig and for most of the driver questions, I answer no. Given I start with a kernel config that already contains everything I need, it is rare that I need anything new. So, I rarely need any of the new drivers. You are likely the same. I think there is a option for it to default to no or yes for all the questions automatically but not all questions are yes or no and sometimes you may need a yes. To me, it's best to use make oldconfig and answer each question. That way you can catch something you can use but you also catch those questions that need a numbered option, 1, 2, 3, 4 or something. If you update often, it shouldn't take long answer the questions. If you do like me and don't update often, it may take longer but no more time than it would if you updated often and added all the time together. As far as I know, if one manually updates their kernel, make oldconfig is the safest and recommended method. You are prompted for new drivers/options and can see if they apply to you or not. If you don't want to update that way, I think there is a kernel that does it's own thing. I think it is sort of like boot media uses. If the time needed to answer all the questions isn't there, that may be a option to look into. It's called genkernel. I've never used it but read it works. In short, make oldconfig is the recommended way as far as I know. In my opinion, it is the safest way to know what you are going to get. Links for more info. https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Kernel/Upgrade https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Kernel/Configuration Someone else may have a different opinion, even a better one. This is how I always do it and kernel failure is rare. Hope it helps. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Slightly corrupted file systems when resuming from hibernation
On Tuesday, 16 April 2024 10:04:43 BST Dr Rainer Woitok wrote: > Michael, > > On Monday, 2024-04-15 12:48:34 +0100, you wrote: > > ... > > Why have you set your /boot to be mounted at boot? > > Well, I think, I then just followed the Gentoo Handbook. But I see your > point of saving time which could be better used to successfully unmount > the "/home/" partition. I'll change my "/etc/fstab" file as well as a > few of my scripts. Thanks for pointing that out :-) > > > ... > > > > MoBo firmware can be notoriously buggy and is > > > > typically frozen/abandoned within a couple of years by the OEMs. In > > addition, kernel code changes and any previous symbiosis with the > > firmware can fall apart with a later kernel release. > > Hm, this sounds a bit like "never change your running kernel", doesn't > it? Not really, because a newer kernel has any security patches, plus it can include bug fixes. You won't know if a later release fixes or breaks something on your system until you tried it. > But this brings up two related questions: > > 1. Why does Gentoo not somehow mark LTS kernels either in the version >number or in the slot name? This would make it easier to prevent the >installation of too modern kernels. My understanding is the gentoo-sources kernels are aligned with the LTS upstream releases. > 2. I'm building new kernels with "make olddefconfig" rather than "make >oldconfig" because I thought providing default values to new configu- >ration variables is a good idea. It is a good idea if the new config items are something you need/want on your system and in addition if the default setting suits your needs. >But what precisely does "make old- >config" do with new configuration variables instead? Just leaving >them out? But what's the difference between not defining a configu- >ration variable and setting it to a default value? Or is "make old- >config" really the way to generate more conservative kernels which do >not as quickly overburden aging motherboards? The make oldconfig script will identify new config items not present in your old kernel config, show which is the default option and ask you to interactively select which one you prefer; e.g. SPECULATION_MITIGATIONS [Y/n/m/?] (NEW) The default option above has been identified as Y, if the devs have determined this is a safe default for the arch. You can hit Enter to select Y, or type 'n' for no, 'm' for module, or '?' to read the extended description and help for this option before you make up your mind. With make olddefconfig the option 'Y' will be automatically selected without asking your input. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[gentoo-user] Re: Slightly corrupted file systems when resuming from hibernation
Michael, On Monday, 2024-04-15 12:48:34 +0100, you wrote: > ... > Why have you set your /boot to be mounted at boot? Well, I think, I then just followed the Gentoo Handbook. But I see your point of saving time which could be better used to successfully unmount the "/home/" partition. I'll change my "/etc/fstab" file as well as a few of my scripts. Thanks for pointing that out :-) > ... > MoBo firmware can be notoriously buggy and is > typically frozen/abandoned within a couple of years by the OEMs. In > addition, > kernel code changes and any previous symbiosis with the firmware can fall > apart with a later kernel release. Hm, this sounds a bit like "never change your running kernel", doesn't it? But this brings up two related questions: 1. Why does Gentoo not somehow mark LTS kernels either in the version number or in the slot name? This would make it easier to prevent the installation of too modern kernels. 2. I'm building new kernels with "make olddefconfig" rather than "make oldconfig" because I thought providing default values to new configu- ration variables is a good idea. But what precisely does "make old- config" do with new configuration variables instead? Just leaving them out? But what's the difference between not defining a configu- ration variable and setting it to a default value? Or is "make old- config" really the way to generate more conservative kernels which do not as quickly overburden aging motherboards? Sincerely, Rainer
