Re: [gentoo-user] new genkernel problem

[Jack]

On 2020.06.06 12:34, Dale wrote:
> Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Sat, 6 Jun 2020 10:13:56 -0500, Dale wrote:
> >
> >>>> If you do copy yours manually to /boot, what command do you use
> for
> >>>> dracut?  Maybe I'm doing it a hard way or something and you have
> a
> >>>> easier method. 
> >>> cd /usr/src/linux
> >>> make all modules_install install
> >>> dracut --kver=$(cat include/config/kernel.release)
> >>>
> >>> It doesn't get much easier ;-)
> >
> >> From what I've read, I like my way better.  I did have to change
> the
> >> names from bzimage* to kernel* but other than that, I can use the
> naming
> >> method I've used for years and keep the good kernels I want.
> > make install names the kernels vmlinuz-$VERSION, and updates a
> symlink to
> > vmlinuz if one exists.
>
> But sometimes I have more than one of the same version.  I add a -1,
> -2,
> -3 etc to them as I go.  From my understanding, make install doesn't
> do
> that.  I do and with good reason. It seems make install won't
> accomplish
> what I do by hand.
That's what to use  CONFIG_LOCALVERSION for.  It gets appended to the  
kernel file name, and to the /usr/lib directory created by  
modules_install.  The hardest part of my figuring out how to use  
genkernel was that it overrides that value in .config, so I had to rig  
up a wrapper script so I could set that on the command line.  That's  
actually better for me, since I don't need to edit .config to rerun  
genkernel if something else changed.
>
> >> On
> >> occasion I remove outdated ones I no longer plan to use.  I still
> wish I
> >> didn't need the init thingy but still.
> > make install doesn't remove anything, that's your job!
>
> Neither does my method.  When /boot starts getting fullish, I use
> uprecords to help determine what kernels to keep along with what
> kernels
> would still be compatible with system changes.  In my opinion, the
> admin
> should do those manually. 
>
>
> >  
> >> My biggest problem, getting the dracut command options right.  If I
> >> didn't need dracut, I'd be in heaven. 
> > If you have a plain setup, dracut shouldn't need any options.
> >
> >
>
> I don't have a plain setup tho nor do I really want that setup.  I
> like
> having backup kernels and my own numbering system.  It has worked for
> me
> for decades, ever since I started using Gentoo and building my own
> kernels.  I don't see any point in changing what works unless I can
> streamline what I'm already getting with the results I expect.  If I
> could get rid of the init thingy, I would have zero issues with my
> method.  It's dracut that causes the issues. We all know how much I
> dislike init thingys tho.  ;-)  That said, dracut hasn't failed me in
> a
> while.  If it can't build correctly, it does spit out it failed.  It's
> been a while since the init thingy it creates has failed as well.  So,
> at least there is that. 
Once I did get genkernel fully configured to my liking (especially  
getting it to append a string of my choosing to the names of all the  
files it creates in /boot and to the /lib/modules directory) it hasn't  
failed, unless the actual kernel compile failed (as for gcc-10, not  
fixed) or the failure to compile something to go into the initramfs  
that started this thread.  I imagine dracut will produce a very similar  
initramfs, and maybe it wont try to pull in an outdated package, but.  
like you, I prefer to stick with what works, unless I have a good  
reason to change, such as simplifying my process, even if it does take  
some effort to get there.
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  :-) 
>
> P. S. Second drive passed the long selftest.  Copying files over as I
> type.  I think this one might live.  I suspect at least one of them
> was
> broken.  I just got the two mixed up.  They are identical in brand and
> size.  Now to go rebuild the mineral site for the deer.  Picked up 150
> lbs of goodness yesterday. :-D
>