Re: Kernel 2.6.3 again
Hello Andreas;
Kai Schindelka (<kai@schindelka.de>) wrote:
Ok. My name's not Wes, but I've got some questions anyway. :)
Please start your own thread next time instead of answering a message in
an existing thread.
my apology. I thought it would be the best to keep the topics together,
but I have already read why it's better to do it the other way.
* Is the updating of the above packages really necessary?
From /usr/src/kernel-source-2.6.3/Documentation/changes:
o Gnu C 2.95.3
o Gnu make 3.78
o binutils 2.12
o util-linux 2.10o
The above packages in Woody are recent enough. util-linux in Woody
however can't handle the new cryptoloop/cryptoapi, so if you want to
use encrypted loopback devices with the drivers included in 2.6,
upgrade util-linux.
Ok, that makes one package more.
o module-init-tools 0.9.10
o e2fsprogs 1.29
module-init-tools is not included in Woody, you need it to load modules
for 2.6.
Yes, that's why I had added the backports.org source in the first
place.
The e2fsprogs version in Woody is too old (may keep working
with existing file systems, but maybe you could get problems with new
ext2/ext3 file systems).
Looks like it keeps working with existing ones. I found no problems, but
didn't create new ones either. It's better to upgrade, I'd say.
o jfsutils 1.1.3
o reiserfsprogs 3.6.3
o xfsprogs 2.6.0
o pcmcia-cs 3.1.21
o quota-tools 3.09
I didn't check the above package, I don't use them.
Same with me.
o PPP 2.4.0
This one is okay.
Thanks.
o isdn4k-utils 3.1pre1
o nfs-utils 1.0.5
Didn't check.
Don't need them, but I will keep that in mind.
o procps 3.1.13
Needs to be upgraded.
Yes, I have read about that.
o oprofile 0.5.3
Don't know.
Ok.
* Is it sufficient, or did I miss something?
If I compare the lists, you should also upgrade e2fsprogs.
So the complete list would be in my case:
hdparm
e2fsprogs
libsysfs
module-init-tools
net-tools
procps
sysfsutils
util-linux
libsysfs and sysfsutils were mentioned by Pigeon. That is too much for a
productive environment, since I don't know nothing about possible side
effects. I'll stick with 2.4.25, but many thanks for your answer anyway.
--
Bye; Kai
Reply to: