| 1 |
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 6:58 PM, Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, 22 May 2015 23:29:40 +0100, Mick wrote: |
| 3 |
>>> |
| 4 |
>>> make install does it exactly the way you are doing it, but faster and |
| 5 |
>>> less prone to error. |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> Hmm ... I may have used it the wrong way quite a few years ago, but it |
| 8 |
>> would only keep two kernels at a time or something like that. That |
| 9 |
>> made me carry on copying kernel files into boot manually. In this way |
| 10 |
>> at least I know where I put them and what options I pass on to them. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> make install installs the kernel it just made. It doesn't, and can't, |
| 13 |
> touch other kernels. The only change it makes to /boot beyond copying |
| 14 |
> three files there is to adjust the symlinks if they are already present. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> I've never understood the approach of trusting the makefile to configure |
| 17 |
> your kernel, compile it, compile any number of modules and install all |
| 18 |
> those modules, but when it comes to copying one file to /boot, that has |
| 19 |
> to be done manually because the makefile can't be trusted to get things |
| 20 |
> right. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
"/sbin/installkernel" renames the already-installed vmlinuz and |
| 23 |
System.map if it's installing the same version of the kernel. |
Archives