On Tuesday, 13 April 2004, at 17:58:27 (-0400), James Olin Oden wrote: > Let me rephrase that, they don't "have to" they should. The reason is > at least two fold: > > 1) If you upgrade a kernel and/or its modules, you will not have > the older kernel to fall back on should the kernel not work on > your box. Been there, done that. > 2) In the same way once the old kernel goes away from that time to > when you reboot the box with the new kernel, bad things will > happen if the kernel decides it needs to load a module, that > will no longer be there to load (I have never tested this, it > seemed like the path of woe (-;). Done that too. Your analysis of the path is correct. :-} Michael -- Michael Jennings (a.k.a. KainX) http://www.kainx.org/ <mej@xxxxxxxxx> n + 1, Inc., http://www.nplus1.net/ Author, Eterm (www.eterm.org) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- "But I dumped her. My motto is, 'Get out before they go down.'" "That is so *not* my motto." -- Monica Geller and Joey Tribbiani, "Friends" _______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
