On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 13:24 -0400, Joe Smith wrote: > One more question, if I may: What's the best strategy for updating at > this point? > > I figure that, for the next kernel update, I'll manually remove the > kernel with the problem, and do the update. The known good kernel should > be the second kernel, and therefore retained. I can then test the > updated kernel. > > Does that sound right? > > Does it make sense to keep testing new kernels, even if there's been no > specific response to this issue? I tend to keep at least three to four kernels. That allows me to test things that I may not have noticed, later on, as well as revert back a few stages should I encounter a fault. Having several kernels installed only seems to make it a bit slower to do yum update (more dependencies to calculate). And users more drive space, obviously. I don't notice any other drawbacks. I'd do updates when they come through, and just remove older ones afterwards if they were a dismal failure, or when I had enough alternatives to work around any other problems. -- [tim@bigblack ~]$ uname -ipr 2.6.22.1-33.fc7 i686 i386 Using FC 4, 5, 6 & 7, plus CentOS 5. Today, it's FC7. Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
