| 1 |
On 4/15/20 11:40 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 11:27 AM james <garftd@×××××××.net> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> It works fabulously, but it is time to upgrade, as most codes dependent |
| 5 |
>> on old software, have been migrated. |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> So should I skip to a version 5 kernel? |
| 8 |
>> If so which one? I usually run hundreds of testing packages so maybe |
| 9 |
>> make the new system all testing? |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> If you're more of the mindset of stability over features (as seems to |
| 12 |
> be the case) then I'd stick with a longterm kernel. That means years |
| 13 |
> of updates that basically shouldn't require anything more than running |
| 14 |
> make oldconfig to deal with. Once in a VERY rare while a new option |
| 15 |
> shows up. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Traditionally yes, but not going forward. About 1/2 are on (going to be) |
| 18 |
the latest and I'll probably just default to every package being the |
| 19 |
latest testing, github or whatever version. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> You should be updating your kernel regularly to address security |
| 23 |
> issues and other regressions. If you stay within the same major.minor |
| 24 |
> series you shouldn't be getting anything other than bugfixes. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Agreed, but most of my systems rarely have a route to the internet or |
| 27 |
are mostly not connected to any ethernet, continuously. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> I personally use the latest longterm, but not until it has been out |
| 31 |
> for a few months. Mainly this is because I use zfs and don't want to |
| 32 |
> deal with what versions of the one are compatible with what versions |
| 33 |
> of the other. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Yep, for the main system, but using btrfs with redundant drives. I'd |
| 36 |
like zfs, but not certain about it's future being open, open-source, |
| 37 |
etc. btrfs has bee great, for what I have done recently. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
> Right now I'm on the 4.19 longterm, and I'm getting to the point where |
| 41 |
> I'm contemplating switching to the 5.4 longterm. If I were in your |
| 42 |
> shoes i'd be looking at 5.4 unless there is a reason not to. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
5.4 sounds good. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
> If you're asking how to actually compile/install/etc a kernel just |
| 47 |
> follow the docs, but you should be doing this regularly. Jumping from |
| 48 |
> 3.18 you're somewhat more likely to run into issues - your biggest |
| 49 |
> headache though will be dealing with the 30,000 prompts you get from |
| 50 |
> make oldconfig and making sure you set all the new options correctly. |
| 51 |
> You won't get that problem going between two patch-level releases (eg |
| 52 |
> 5.4.31 -> 5.4.32). |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
Agreed. I was bad sick, off and on for 3 years. Rare blood sugar..... |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
80% protein diet fixed it all. NO medications, no sugar very few slow |
| 57 |
carbs, finally. So, basically my mind was 80% erased. Good thing I kept |
| 58 |
notes and a myriad of sporadic 'howto docs'. |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
Kernel hacking was void for 3 years. Now I feel GREAT and have many |
| 61 |
gentoo ambitions, 5G and embedded centric stuff; but also a mail and a |
| 62 |
web server, with very tight security. DNS primaries on little, ram |
| 63 |
intensive arm boards, are pretty sweet when combined with cloudflare's |
| 64 |
free, secure dns. |
| 65 |
|
| 66 |
|
| 67 |
Thank for all the help/ideas, |
| 68 |
James |
Archives