[arch-general] Reboot - Versioned Kernel Installs
jtwdyp at ttlc.net
Fri Jun 10 21:21:17 EDT 2011
It would appear that on Jun 10, Heiko Baums did say:
> Am Fri, 10 Jun 2011 12:48:57 +0200
> schrieb Vic Demuzere <vic at demuzere.be>:
> > Having multiple kernels is insane. I don't get why it's needed. There
> > is a live cd to rescue your system if needed.
> And the old kernel packages (every package) are saved in pacman's cache
> (usually /var/cache/pacman/pkg) anyway until pacman -Sc or pacman -Scc
> is run. So every package can easily be downgraded by running pacman
> -U /var/cache/pacman/pkg/<package-file-name>.
Mind specifying for an idiot like me just which package-file-names I'd need to
use with pacman -U to restore the previous kernel, complete with it's modules?
-snipped. . . . . . . . . .stuff
> The better and much cleaner solution is to first try the fallback initrd
> or to install a different kernel package like kernel26-lts parallel to
> Keep in mind, those cases in which an updated kernel is unbootable
> are very, very rare.
> And people who need a reliable system and are so afraid of
> broken kernels, of course, shouldn't use [testing]. They should better
> install a multiboot system with one stable system and one test system.
> This way they can test kernel updates from [testing] on their test
> system and update the kernel on their stable system only if the test
> system is working correctly. This would, btw., help to filing bug
> reports for the kernels on esoteric hardware before they get into
Now that, Heiko, is a good idea. And one that I could actually do. I'd just
have to decide which of my other Linux distributions to sacrifice to make
room for it... Keeping in mind that as you say: "those cases in which an
updated kernel is unbootable are very, very rare." I think I'd rather learn
how to use the "pacman -U" method...
| ~^~ ~^~
| <*> <*> Joe (theWordy) Philbrook
| ^ J(tWdy)P
| \___/ <<jtwdyp at ttlc.net>>
More information about the arch-general