On Monday, June 06, 2011 11:34:53 Thomas Dziedzic wrote: > 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" Or just 'kernel.' And yes, -1 on multiple kernels. That was one of the more idiotic brain- damaged practices of Ubuntu that drove me away in the first place.
