| 1 |
On Fri, 22 May 2015 23:29:40 +0100, Mick wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > make install does it exactly the way you are doing it, but faster and |
| 4 |
> > less prone to error. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Hmm ... I may have used it the wrong way quite a few years ago, but it |
| 7 |
> would only keep two kernels at a time or something like that. That |
| 8 |
> made me carry on copying kernel files into boot manually. In this way |
| 9 |
> at least I know where I put them and what options I pass on to them. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
make install installs the kernel it just made. It doesn't, and can't, |
| 12 |
touch other kernels. The only change it makes to /boot beyond copying |
| 13 |
three files there is to adjust the symlinks if they are already present. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I've never understood the approach of trusting the makefile to configure |
| 16 |
your kernel, compile it, compile any number of modules and install all |
| 17 |
those modules, but when it comes to copying one file to /boot, that has |
| 18 |
to be done manually because the makefile can't be trusted to get things |
| 19 |
right. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Microbiology: staph only. |
Archives