On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Tavian Barnes <tavianator@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 6 June 2011 10:02, KESHAV P.R. <skodabenz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hi all, >> Since the next kernel will be 3.0 , the kernel26 naming is >> meaningless from the next kernel. I think this is also a good time to >> consider implementing versioned kernel install. Agreed arch has a >> policy of 1 package per software in the official repos. While this >> attitude is acceptable for Xorg or windows managers or even some low >> level utilities, problems with those can be corrected if the system >> can boot to a shell atleast (init 1 or 3). But if the kernel fails to >> boot and under the assumption that the user hdoes not have any rescue >> system/distro handy he/she cannot boot into the system (atleast not at >> that moment). Without a working kernel it is not possible to boot to a >> shell to run any damn command. >> While this topic has already been discussed at [1] the >> discussion was slow and has not lead to any fruitful result. This post >> is mainly to reach out to a larger audience and decide on how to go >> about since the upsteam version change provides the right time for >> Arch to reconsider the same. Another discussion at [2] is about >> removing the word kernel from the initramfs image. If in case >> versioned kernel proposal is accepted then the initramfs also >> (automatically) becomes versioned to match the kernel. Atleast Dave >> Reisner (falconindy) took the first step by making the change in his >> geninit program. I understand this might require changes in the way >> mkinitcpio (or geninit if at all it becomes default) and the way >> pacman handles different versions of same packages. Please join in. >> >> [1] https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/16702 >> [2] https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/18719 >> >> Regards. >> >> keshav >> > > I have kernel26-lts installed as a backup kernel, and this is all > that's really necessary for rolling back broken kernel updates. I've > been bitten by a BTRFS bug once and rolled back with -lts no problem. > -1 from me on keeping multiple kernel versions installed; I really > like that arch doesn't keep 6 old kernels around. > > While we're at it, +1 for calling the kernel package "linux" for version 3.0. > > -- > Tavian Barnes > Agreed with Tavian Barnes. Also, don't call it "linux30" just call it "linux"
