| 1 |
Albert Hopkins wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, 2007-07-17 at 15:19 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> On Tuesday 17 July 2007, Mick wrote: |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>>> On Tuesday 17 July 2007 13:20, Billy McCann wrote: |
| 7 |
>>> |
| 8 |
>>>> Hi Mick. From what I understand, using oldconfig for major |
| 9 |
>>>> version changes (.20 -> .21) is a bad idea. Here's what I did. It |
| 10 |
>>>> may be slow and stupid but it worked like a charm. |
| 11 |
>>>> |
| 12 |
>>> Sure, but I have been using oldconfig for previous major changes and |
| 13 |
>>> never had a problem like this before. |
| 14 |
>>> |
| 15 |
>> Now you know why the kernel devs keep telling you not to do it, heh :-) |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> I don't know which kernel dev keeps saying that, but I'd recommend |
| 20 |
> he/she specify what is meant by "major version" since, historically: |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> 2.6.22 |
| 23 |
> ^ ^ ^ |
| 24 |
> | | +--- Revision |
| 25 |
> | +----- Minor version |
| 26 |
> +------- Major version |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> And therefore .20 -> .21 would not be considered a "major" version |
| 29 |
> change by most accounts. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> -- |
| 32 |
> Albert W. Hopkins |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
I have used oldconfig for years and have not had any problems with it |
| 37 |
either. I never went as far as going from a 2.4 kernel to a 2.6 kernel |
| 38 |
though. I'm pretty sure that wouldn't work. I see no reason why this |
| 39 |
shouldn't work since so many of us have done it before without a problem. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Maybe you missed something simple? I know it's the simple things that |
| 42 |
get me a lot. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
Dale |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
:-) :-) :-) |
Archives