I would really like to the kernel that is being replaced kept as a backup. If the latest kernel breaks your hardware, or something else goes wrong, I'd like to have the option of using the kernel that was just replaced, because it's known to work. I wouldn't want more than one old version of the kernel, though. Also, although the -lts kernel is good for this, it isn't intended to solve this problem, and isn't always a perfect fit. For instance, my new laptop has UEFI-related issues that are only being addressed in the *very* latest kernels. I'm not sure -lts would boot for me, but I know that my *current* kernel boots; seems a pity to throw it out it straight away on upgrade, before I can test that the new kernel boots OK... Paul On Monday 06 June 2011 18:23:50 Tom Gundersen wrote: > On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:22 PM, Tavian Barnes <tavianator@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > 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. > > I agree. > > The reason I am against keeping old kernels around is that we would > not be able to test user space against all the possible combinations, > so it would not be a good idea to suggest that we do (we do try to > support all sorts of self-compiled kernels, but at least if you > compile your own kernel it is pretty obvious that it will not be as > well tested as the "official" ones). > > One possibility would be to do like upstream does and always rename > the previous kernel to .old. That should keep the last known working > kernel around while making it clear that it should not be relied on > for day-to-day use (and that it will get overwritten on the next > kernel upgrade so these things won't get old). > > That said, I'm not involved with packaging the kernel, so if you want > anything to change with how it is packaged (maybe after this > discussion is over), it would be best to file a feature request on FS. > > Cheers, > > Tom
