On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Tom Gundersen <teg@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 4:54 PM, Paul Gideon Dann <pdgiddie@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wednesday 08 June 2011 15:45:21 Tom Gundersen wrote: >>> On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Jelle van der Waa <jelle@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> > If you want this, implement it! I have seen some discussions about it and >>> > it always tend to users wanting feature X or Y, but didn't commit to it. >>> > protip: iirc there are some threads about this on the mailing list, the >>> > forums and the bugtracker, start gathering info there. >>> >>> Implementing this should be almost trivial, it's just a patch to >>> kernel26.install. I think if someone wants to see this feature, the >>> best way would be to post a patch to arch-projects@xxxxxxxxxxxxx. >> >> That's true; I'll try to find some time to do this in the next week or so, if >> someone doesn't beat me to it. >> >> I was just expecting to contribute to the discussion regarding the best way to >> deal with kernel upgrades, but if you think this patch would be accepted, I'd >> be happy to provide it. > > Cool! I'd be in favor of the patch, but I don't know if it will be > accepted (I'm not the maintainer). At least you'll get the attention > of the right people :) > > -t > Such a patch would also have to copy the modules (which aren't under kernel26's 'purview'). For example, nvidia gets upgraded on a major version kernel update, the old kernel which has been renamed doesn't 'work' graphically anymore.
