RE: Installing new kernel
On Tue, 2002-09-10 at 02:31, David Pastern wrote:
> Mark,
>
> I think I just typed "make" to be honest. That's my own idiocy there, I
> should have known that it was make config (or make xconfig in X). It still
> seemed to work though. Could I have accidently broken something and it's
> not appearing in any manifestations yet? I did get options for
> video/sound/network. make-kpkg is not recognised on my Debian system. I'm
> not sure why. I've reinstalled Debian 4 times in the past near week and a
> half (because on some stuff i'd cocked up, and I couldn't find any reference
> on how to fix my cock-ups) and make-kpkg has previously worked. I'm at a
> loss as to why it's not working now.
Okay, if you got options for various features, it sounds like Makefile
*evolves* depending on what else has been done to that point - can
anyone else confirm that?
Make-kpkg is a separate package to be, umm, apt-gotten, but once you
have it, it is great at consolidating and managing the main work of
building the kernel.
>
> At what exact point of the process of compiling the new kernel would I do
> the make-kpkg. After everything else i've done? Or somewhere in between?
> I'd suspect between the make clean && make dep and the make bzImage. That
> makes sense to my logic.
Do the make clean && make dep, and then the rest of the "make" tasks get
handled by make-kpkg, and the actual copies of the appropriate files
into the appropriate locations are handled by dpkg -i
kernel-whatever-version. This also allows you, down the road, to say
apt-get remove kernel-whatever-oldversion when you no longer need/want
the old one around.
>
> But - woohoo! I've finally got X, networking and mount cdrom problem licked.
> So i'm rather tickled. Oh and apt-get is awesome. That has to be my fave
> thing about Debian so far. I can't stop raving about it. Anyways ta for
> advice, much appreciated.
X11 is not always immediately obvious - for me, it sent me scrambling
back to my memories of tweaking MS Windows 3.1 and earlier, and in those
days, configuration was done with a text program running on the console.
That said, I've never been able to get XDMCP working without it hanging
gdm - that is the ability to start up X11 on and actually be running all
of the programs on another machine. It may be that there is the old
saying that the language best known by computer programmers is
"Profanity", but once you have the activities understood and configured,
the control and the knowledge of what is happening gives the System
Administrator much more power over the machine and its performance -
much better than Microsoft's latest update so that they can take over
your machine whenever they find it convenient to disable non-MS
software.
>
> Dave
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark L. Kahnt [mailto:kahnt@hosehead.dyndns.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, 10 September 2002 4:11 PM
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org; David Pastern
> Subject: RE: Installing new kernel
>
>
>
> On Tue, 2002-09-10 at 02:01, David Pastern wrote:
> > Bob,
> >
> > Excuse my ignorance,
> >
> > When I recently upgraded my kernel, I was told by a friend to do:
> >
> > apt-get install kernel-source-version (in my instance
> kernel-source-2.4.18).
> >
> > What is the difference between apt getting the kernel-image versus
> > kernel-source? I noticed that the kernel-source d/l to /usr/src. Then I
> > untarred it and went into the newly created dir and ran make. I then
> > compiled the kernel and modules. After doing that I ran "make dep && make
> > clean". Then I did "make bzImage". I then did "make modules" and then
> > "make modules_install". Once that was all done I did "depmod -a".
>
> I'm hoping that first make is something like "make config", "make
> menuconfig" or "make xconfig", so that you can adjust the kernel to the
> needs of your system, such as specific graphic, network or sound cards.
> Otherwise, everything you've done sounds like it is right out of the
> kernel source README, and what works fine for many people nearly every
> time.
>
> That said, using kernel-image-version allows people to draw upon
> pre-built kernels with modules for all manner of equipment - many
> modules that individual machines likely *don't* need. It works for most
> situations as well, but there is the chaff and it may not be the *most*
> efficient configuration for your machine.
>
> What is recommended with Debian, however, is to use make-kpkg after you
> do the configuring and "make dep" - it handles much of the individual
> aspects of preparing a kernel, including specific kernel source, headers
> and documentation for your configuration if you specify it, and creates
> .debs that you can install and remove with dpkg, which should make your
> future kernel management more efficient, and fit in with the overall
> Debian software management system.
>
> >
> > Once done I copied the System.map and bzImage files to the /boot dir and
> > then renamed them with appropriate names. I then had to manually update
> > lilo.conf and then restart lilo. Reboot and hey presto! Is the way i've
> > done it wrong? It seems to have worked for me, and it was advice I
> received
> > from a friend (a debian user), reading from several books and man pages.
> > Please let me know if i'm doing things wrong. It does seem to have
> worked,
> > and corresponds to what I read in my books!
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bob Nielsen [mailto:nielsen@oz.net]
> > Sent: Monday, 9 September 2002 3:44 PM
> > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org; David Pastern
> > Subject: Re: Installing new kernel
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 09:54:10AM +0530, J.S.Sahambi wrote:
> > > Sorry, I meant kernel-image-2.4.19-686 (I think this is the latest!)
> > >
> > > Currently I have kernel 2.4.18-bf2.4. If I install the new kernel image
> > > with the command:
> > >
> > > apt-get install kernel-image-2.4.19-686 ,
> > >
> > >
> > > 1) will it install the kernel in a saparate dir and not mess up the dir
> > > of older kernel?
> >
> > It will install the kernel in the same directory, /boot, but it will
> > have a unique name (vmlinuz-2.4.19-686).
> >
> > >
> > > 2) will it add one more item inthe lilo for the new kernel and so that
> > > In can select the older kernel at boot time, in case I want?
> >
> > IIRC (I use grub), the older kernel gets labelled something like
> > OldLinux, while the new one will be Linux. Grub will show many more
> > possibilities if the kernels exist.
> >
> > >
> > > 3) and will I be able to remove this new kerenl in case I want and still
> > > have the older kernel on the system.
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > >
> > > 4) do I have to install any other package apart from
> > > kernel-image-2.4.19-686? like kernel-header, etc?
> >
> > No (some self-compiled programs get the headers from kernel-headers or
> > kernel-source, however).
> >
> >
>
--
Mark L. Kahnt, FLMI/M, ALHC, HIA, AIAA, ACS, MHP
ML Kahnt New Markets Consulting
Tel: (613) 531-8684 / (613) 539-0935
Email: kahnt@hosehead.dyndns.org
All attempts at Linux viruses should be GPL'd, with source included ;)
Reply to: