2010/7/17 Rafael Beraldo <rafaelluisberaldo@xxxxxxxxx>: > 2010/7/17 Thomas Dziedzic <gostrc@xxxxxxxxx> > >> On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 10:10 AM, Ng Oon-Ee <ngoonee@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Sat, 2010-07-17 at 09:17 -0500, Victor Lowther wrote: >> >> On Sat, 2010-07-17 at 18:05 +0400, Евгений Борисов wrote: >> >> > I think it's a bad idea, because the directory >> /lib/modules/$oldVersion$ >> >> > will be removed when the package is upgraded kernel. Trivial solution >> not >> >> > exists. >> >> >> >> My solution is to hand-roll my own kernels and initramfs'es after >> >> removing the kernel and mkinitcpio packages. The way Arch handles its >> >> kernel packages is a weak point -- Fedora and Ubuntu get this bit right. >> > >> > Yeah, why not keep all previous kernels and headers around. We could >> > automatically extend menu.lst too! >> > >> > I'm not sure what you like about Fedora and Ubuntu handling of kernels, >> > but I found it very annoying to have all that stuff hanging around. >> > Would be worse with rolling release I'm sure. >> > >> > >> >> Agreed with Ng Oon-Ee on this one. >> > > > In this case, I think the best would be the middle ground. I mean, when > upgrading the kernel, the older would be named “vmlinuz26-old” and the > initramfs “kernel26-old.img”. This would be a secutiry measure --- what if a > new kernel doesn't work? > > As I have said, I keep a backup kernel which I know works. (I don't upgrade both of them without testing the other). You could just install a kernel that works and never upgrade it to be safe :P
