Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Tomas Mozes <hydrapolic@×××××.com>
To: "gentoo-dev@l.g.o" <gentoo-dev@l.g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Bootloader use in eclean-kernel
Date: Sat, 23 May 2020 06:44:56
Message-Id: CAG6MAzTCRZ5pU9tF3m3jBw8BTR7QkG-BzdKkzaGHvvhUW_R_4Q@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Bootloader use in eclean-kernel by "Michał Górny"
1 On Friday, May 22, 2020, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
2 > Hi, everyone.
3 >
4 > I've finally found some time to revive eclean-kernel, and I'm having
5 > some doubts about the way bootloaders are used (in ek1). I'd like to
6 > hear your opinion on whether the old behavior should be kept or removed
7 > in favor of more-like-ek2 behavior.
8 >
9 > Originally, ek1 assumed that we shouldn't normally remove kernels that
10 > are listed in the bootloader. It made sense back in the day when I was
11 > using LILO, and it just took whatever was linked to /boot/vmlinuz{,.old}
12 > and ek removed the rest. Today, it makes less sense with bootloaders
13 > like GRUB2 or systemd-boot that normally just use all installed kernels.
14 >
15 > Alternatively, ek1 had destructive mode (a misnomer probably) that just
16 > kept N newest kernels and removed older. This is also the behavior
17 > exhibited by ek2 (since I've never gotten to implement bootloaders).
18 >
19 > The truth is, the bootloader support code in ek1 is ugly and needs
20 > a major refactoring. However, I'm wondering whether it's worth
21 > the effort or if I should just remove it altogether.
22 >
23 > Hence my question: do you find 'do not remove kernels listed
24 > in bootloader config' feature useful? Do you think it should remain
25 > the default? Do you think it is worthwhile to continue supporting it?
26 >
27 > --
28 > Best regards,
29 > Michał Górny
30 >
31 >
32
33 Hello,
34 My flow is like:
35 - install gentoo-sources
36 - build kernel and install to /boot
37 - eclean-kernel -d -n 2
38 - grub-config
39
40 Tomas