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

Re: Boarding SuSE with Debian

On Wed, Aug 07, 2002 at 09:19:28PM -0700, Nate Campi wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 08, 2002 at 12:57:24PM +1000, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 07, 2002 at 03:24:59PM -0700, Nate Campi wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 07, 2002 at 03:17:45PM -0700, Nate Campi wrote:
> > In some ways trying to use the same kernel introduces as much risk as it
> > avoids... I'd probably be inclined to risk a new kernel rather than risk
> > stuffing up running the old kernel under a new distro...
> There's always a hundred reasons one approach *could* fail, and if you
> have an old kernel that needs modules and an initrd image this approach
> is more difficult.
> He needs to be _very_ careful with this approach no matter which advice
> he acts on. If his current kernel is a non-modular kernel with no initrd
> image (like mine was), I strongly advise re-using it.

Agreed. _If_ the existing kernel is non-modular with no initrd, then use it.
You still want to make sure you are using a fs that is compiled in.

However, most distro's now use fully modular initrd images. I have found the
Debian default modular kernels to work fine with every hardware combination
I have thrown at them. 

The only time I compile kernels now is when I want something highly unusual
and/or special that the default kernels don't have (ie, DOV, IPSec, etc).
Even in these cases, I use the same kernel config, only tweaking it as
required, and build a kernel-package modular initrd packages. This way I
know that the kernel can handle any fs or additional hardware I throw at it
without having to recompile.

ABO: finger abo@minkirri.apana.org.au for more info, including pgp key

Reply to: