2010/2/1 Nilesh Govindarajan <lists@xxxxxxxxxx>: > On 02/01/2010 08:53 PM, Ng Oon-Ee wrote: >> >> On Mon, 2010-02-01 at 15:59 +0100, ludovic coues wrote: >>> >>> 2010/2/1 Emmanuel Benisty<benisty.e@xxxxxxxxx> >>> >>>> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 8:35 PM, Nilesh Govindarajan<lists@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> How to install multiple kernels using pacman ? >>>>> >>>>> Arch should do something like Fedora/Redhat. Maintain 1-2 previous >>>> >>>> kernels >>>>> >>>>> so that if a new one is buggy, then the old one can be used. >>>> >>>> QFT. >>>> >>>> WAIT WHAT? >>>> http://www.archlinux.org/packages/core/i686/kernel26-lts/ >>>> http://www.archlinux.org/packages/core/x86_64/kernel26-lts/ >>>> >>> >>> lts is not for everyday desktop usage. >>> >>> By the way, there should be a way to get older with something like that >>> pacman -S kernel26-2.6.32.6-1 >>> >>> In my mind, when package version is specified, pacman look if the asked >>> version is in the repo, and get it if there is such a version. >>> Lot of app would only provide the current version, but some critical app, >>> like kernel, could provide one or two older version. Just by letting them >>> in >>> the repo. >>> >>> But maybe I'm totally wrong, and this will not work cause every kernel >>> module work only with the current one. >>> >> Two words: rolling release. >> >> Once kernel26-2.6.32.7-1 is in [core], mirrors will not have >> kernel26-2.6.32.6-1 anymore. This is one of the central ideas about >> Arch, that everyone is running basically the same system with different >> beads on top. kernel26-lts is there for those who want stability (in >> which case they should use their own kernel26-custom, and perhaps >> shouldn't use Arch at all). Kernel modules and the like are all >> targetted for the current kernel in [core], its a tremendous duplication >> to have to keep versions for all of those, too. >> >> In summary, yes you're totally wrong, and no, its not for the reason you >> think. >> > > Agreed. But recently a USB problem (possibly a bug) was being discussed > heavily on the forums. What about it ? Didn't the developers test the kernel > properly before releasing it to the community ? Oh my! A bug! But software never has bugs, and we should test everything for months before releasing it! Seriously, do you think we purposely release buggy software? (We don't) Do strive for a rock solid system? No, because our users (and us!) want a more bleeding-edge distro that uses the latest version of upstream software. If you don't want this you shouldn't be using Arch. -Dan
