On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Victor Lowther <victor.lowther@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, 2010-07-17 at 23:10 +0800, Ng Oon-Ee 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! > > It wold be better than updating to a new kernel, rebooting, and having > to boot to a LiveCD to get back into your system because the new kernel > fscked things up. > > Keeping versioned header files also comes in handy -- I take it you heve > never tried any sort of testing with out-of-tree drivers or kernel > subsystems? Using DKMS on arch is a pointless waste of time because > older kernel headers are not kept around. > >> 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. > > I like knowing that I will not have to hunt for a LiveCD or a rescue USB > drive if a kernel update renders the system unbootable. > > This wouldn't be a problem if you have a backup kernel :)
