Re: What will be old configurations if new kernel installed
Hi,
I didn't find /usr/share/kernel-image-2.4.18-bf.2.4/ also there isn't
any kernel image folder on my machine (?) So i forget all other things
and installed bf2.4 again (apt-get update && apt-get install
kernel-image-2.4.18-bf2.4) Everything went fine. I were asked just a few
questions, that's all. I've not had dependency problems. And i rebooted
my machine. (But before this i run lilo. It said "Skipping vmlinuz.OLD")
Still, i can't believe that's ok. :))
Here is new kernel properties:
# dpkg -s kernel-image-2.4.18-bf2.4 |more
Package: kernel-image-2.4.18-bf2.4
Status: install ok installed
Priority: optional
Section: base
Installed-Size: 16024
Maintainer: Eduard Bloch <blade@debian.org>
Source: kernel-image-2.4.18-i386bf
Version: 2.4.18-5woody5
Provides: kernel-image, kernel-image-2.4
Depends: fileutils (>= 4.0), modutils (>= 2.3.12)
Suggests: lilo (>= 19.1), fdutils, kernel-doc-2.4.18
Description: Linux kernel image for version 2.4.18 (bf variant) on 386.
Thanks everybody, Riku.
04-12-2003 Per?embe günü saat 14:00 sularında, Riku Valli dedi ki:
> Hi
> It seems at you are only upgraded your kernel-headers package...
> You should see something about kernel-image-2.4.....
> and that packages shouls ask something about lilo and etc...
> It seems at your kernel is little bit earlier image ....
> so check
> /usr/share/kernel-image-2.4.18-bf2.4/changelog.gz It open with command
> zless.
> You should see something like that
> * Rebuilt against .....
> Added TASK_SIZE check to do_brk in mm/mmap.c
>
> if not you should install new kernel-image which is normal behaviour,
> because traditionally Debian never upgrade new kernel (this is not true in
> all cases)
>
> Do apt-get install kernel-image-2.4.18apt-get install kernel-image-2.4.18-bf2.4-bf2.4
> and it will install never kernel i hope, but you have some problems with
> your depencies, because
> your upgrade kept back three packages. Some think broken ? You can put them
> also up to date.
> apt-get install mc and so on
>
> After that you can clean package cache with command apt-get clean
>
> Correct version is 2.4.18-5woody5 compare with field Version:
>
> You can check it dpkg -s kernel-image-2.4.18-bf2.4 |more
>
> Regards, Riku
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "E&Erdem" <werdem@lycos.co.uk>
> To: "Riku Valli" <riku.valli@piilinna.net>
> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 1:39 PM
> Subject: Re: What will be old configurations if new kernel installed
>
>
> > Hi,
> > I had done apt-get update && apt-get upgrade, just after i recieved
> > CAN-2003-0961. But I've not been sure it's ok. And I've done it again
> > after i added "deb http://security.debian.org/ stable/updates main
> > contrib non-free" (my old line was "security.debian.org/ stable/updates
> > main") line to sources.list. Here is what it's done:
> >
> > # apt-get upgrade
> > Reading Package Lists... Done
> > Building Dependency Tree... Done
> > The following packages have been kept back
> > ksysguardd libgd1 mc
> > The following packages will be upgraded
> > kernel-headers-2.4.18-bf2.4
> > 1 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 3 not upgraded.
> > Need to get 3424kB of archives.
> > After unpacking 0B of additional disk space will be used.
> > Do you want to continue? [Y/n]
> > Get:1 http://security.debian.org stable/updates/main
> > kernel-headers-2.4.18-bf2.4 2.4.18-5woody5 [3424kB]
> > Fetched 3424kB in 4m21s
> > (13.1kB/s)
> > (Reading database ... 70680 files and directories currently installed.)
> > Preparing to replace kernel-headers-2.4.18-bf2.4 2.4.18-5woody4 (using
> > .../kernel-headers-2.4.18-bf2.4_2.4.18-5woody5_i386.deb) ...
> > Unpacking replacement kernel-headers-2.4.18-bf2.4 ...
> > Setting up kernel-headers-2.4.18-bf2.4 (2.4.18-5woody5) ...
> >
> > Is this ok? Is there a way to check if it's ok? Sory, if this questions
> > are silly.
> >
> > Thanks...
> >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "E&Erdem" <werdem@lycos.co.uk>
> > > To: <debian-security@lists.debian.org>
> > > Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 12:23 PM
> > > Subject: What will be old configurations if new kernel installed
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > > I use 2.4.28-bf2.4, and i want to change it to
> > > > kernel-image-2.4.18-1-386_2.4.18-12_i386.deb for new security upgrade,
> > > > but this will be first time for me. I have not upgraded kernel before
> > > > this. What will be my configurations? For example my old modules
> (sound,
> > > > eth, USB, iptables etc.) will been changed?
> > > >
> > > > I know this is a newbie's question. And this list doesn't seem for
> > > > newbies. But i've asked this question on a user list and
> irc.debian.org
> > > > #debian channel. And didn't recieve any reply. May be i'm very
> > > > impetuous. But this is very important, isn't it?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks from now...
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > __________________________________________________________________
> > > > E&Erdem
> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-security-request@lists.debian.org
> > > > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> > > listmaster@lists.debian.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > This image is updated (included do_brk security patch). Do only apt-get
> > > update apt-get upgrade
> > > and you will get recent image and modules.
> > >
> > > Installation ask few questions You should answer these questions.
> > > You should check at you /etc/apt/sources.list
> > > has that row...
> > > deb http://security.debian.org/ stable/updates main contrib non-free
> > >
> > > If you like change. Do apt-get update apt-get install
> > > kernel-image-2.4.18-1-386
> > > It' install new modules and kernel. It's not touch your module config
> > > /etc/modules
> > >
> > > That's it. Only if you are compiled your own modules you should compiled
> > > them again.
> > >
> > > Regards, Riku
> > --
> > __________________________________________________________________
> > E&Erdem
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
--
__________________________________________________________________
E&Erdem
------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: