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 |