Re: kernel upgrade options - follow-up
on 16 Oct 99, Brad wrote...
>
>On Sat, 16 Oct 1999, John wrote:
>
>> It seems an opportunity to upgrade to 2.2.7, and etc, etc
>
>i'd recommend 2.2.12 (the latest), although 2.2.7 might be my second
>choice.
>
I've now discovered that my Debian CD-ROM contains kernel-source-
2.2.1 under the devel directory. Can I not use this? I'd like to avoid
a long download (approx 70mins I believe) until I have some experience.
If this is safe perhaps I can gain experience by then patching to 2.2.7
or 2.2.12.
>
>> According to the Howto the kernel should be in /usr/src/linux - it
>> seems to be in /usr/include/linux/2.0.36 on my box.
>
>Odd... What i'd recommend is to put the kernel into /usr/src/linux-version
>(where version is the version number, e.g. 2.2.7), and symlink
>/usr/src/linux to that directory.
>
I've rechecked and it is in /usr/include with many .h files and some
directories for example dpkg. Should the symlink be to /usr/include?
>> Much is written about the benefits of being able to compile to ones
>> exact needs, etc, etc
>
>This is one of the parts it's hard for us to help you with, because it
>depends on what hardware you have in your computer and what you plan on
>doing with it. For example, if you have no SCSI, disable SCSI support
>(except in a few cases). If you have no IDE drives, disable all that.
>
>Look at which modules you use (in modconf, probably) as a good indication
>of some of the features you should keep. And, on the other hand, you can
>probably remove the modules that you never use from the kernel. And whan
>in doubt, go with what you have in your present kernel.
>
I should be alright on this when I'm sure how to remove unwanted modules,
do I just use the rm command - i.e. are the kernel files just ordinary files
for this purpose?
>
>> Yet again, 2.2.7.tar.gz is 13M of I know not what etc, etc
>>
>You just download the one big source package, even the files you don't
>need. It's a bit inconvienient (especially if you have to pay per MB), but
>it's generally felt that it would be more confusing and inconvienient to
>make separate tarballs for everything...
>
Fine, I follow that.
>> As I have CD-ROMS for RedHat and SuSE, could I use one of these?
>
>you probably could, but i'm not sure you'd want to...
>
Is this to preserve the philosophical purity of Debian? If so I agree
and understand, but feel a short cut might be acceptable in the
early stages of learning. I could also bring over Pine and Netscape
which I badly need on Debian for surfing, mail etc.
>
>As a final note, check out the kernel-package package. It'll make a deb
>that you can install with dpkg, that will properly install the modules,
>help you a little with lilo, and various other random things it's easy to
>forget.
>
I've been unable to locate kernel-package so far. Incidentally, as I have
the three Linux distributions on the disk at the moment, I boot from
floppies - I presume there will be the option to make a new disk during
the install/config when I do start.
I'm most grateful that you have taken the time to respond with help. This
to me is a significant reason for preferring to end up with Debian (I've
long taken for granted my computer will no longer crash!! That's
acceptance not ingratitude).
Regards, John.
Reply to: