| 1 |
On 22 Oct 2009, at 19:50, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thursday 22 October 2009 20:17:46 Maxim Wexler wrote: |
| 3 |
>>> Why not copy over the .29 config and run make oldconfig? |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> I thought of that, but isn't there too much difference in the |
| 6 |
>> versions? I read somewhere that taking to big a leap between versions |
| 7 |
>> is unsafe. Not to mention the great whack of new options. If you do a |
| 8 |
>> diff -y between the two configs there are lots of gaps. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> That's version jumps like 2.4 to 2.6 |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> The 2.6 development model is small incremental steps, so the odds |
| 14 |
> are always |
| 15 |
> in your favour that it will work just fine. Occasionally you might |
| 16 |
> find two |
| 17 |
> versions that don't like to play nicely with oldconfig but that |
| 18 |
> isn't the |
| 19 |
> norm. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> FWIW, I haven't encountered a single problem with the entire 2.6 |
| 22 |
> range. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
There was a change between 2.6.x and 2.6.x+1 where the whole .config |
| 25 |
was rearranged and `make oldconfig` no longer worked. It was a while |
| 26 |
ago, so maybe you don't recall it. I think x was circa 22 or so. It |
| 27 |
was discussed on here at the time, IIRC, and caused filesystems such |
| 28 |
as ext2 (at least) to be unselected if you just ran `make oldconfig`. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Stroller. |
Archives