[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Potato->Woody kernel upgrade problems



On Thu, 18 Apr 2002 15:32, Michael Piefel wrote:
> The Crash
>   Well, simply, it was the wrong kernel. The guide recommends to install
> a new kernel with: apt-get install kernel-image-2.4.18-{386,586tsc,686}
> However, the system has a AMD K6. Of course it's his fault for choosing

386, 486, and 586 kernels work fine on a K6.  When in doubt use a 386 kernel, 
it'll run on any x86 system that runs Linux.

> No Disk
>   The old kernel was handcrafted. The new one makes an initial RAM disk
> and loads the modules mentioned in /etc/modules. Of course, the disk
> driver had been compiled in before. I'm not sure what to do about this.
> kernel-image _could_ have warned about the missing SCSI driver, but I
> guess it's difficult. Perhaps an even bigger note about the perils of
> installing a new kernel?

It's a pity they de-installed the old kernel.  If they'd kept it as 
/vmlinuz.old then it would have been a lot less pain.

> No Net
>   The appropriate alias for eth0 was missing. This is a case of getting
> tired with all those "config file was changed by you or a script"
> messages when very often you are sure that you didn't touch it. In this
> case, a split to "common aliases" and "additional user aliases" in
> seperate files would have helped, but I'm not sure about how sensible
> this is. Perhaps three-way-diffs in dpkg would be helpful.

It's best to create your own file for such things, then an upgrade won't 
touch it.  I've been bitten by this too.  :(

-- 
If you send email to me or to a mailing list that I use which has >4 lines
of legalistic junk at the end then you are specifically authorizing me to do
whatever I wish with the message and all other messages from your domain, by
posting the message you agree that your long legalistic sig is void.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org



Reply to: