Re: [gentoo-user] new genkernel problem

[Jack]

On 6/6/20 6:34 PM, Dale wrote:
> Neil Bothwick wrote:
>> On Sat, 6 Jun 2020 11:34:28 -0500, Dale wrote:
>>>>>  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.
>> There's a kernel option that does that automatically, LOCALVERSION I
>> think, but it's years since I've needed to touch it.
>
> But if it changes how it works and I don't know it, that could cause
> problems.  It could even remove something I don't want removed.  If I
> do it myself, I know what is done and don't remove anything I don't
> want to lose. Even the make commands change between kernels at times. 
> I suspect make install has changes too.  I don't want to have to track
> kernel changes just to know if I can use make install and still get
> what I have now.
LOCALVERSION is a kernel setting in .config.  All the kernel make 
commands handle it consistently, and have not changed in a long time.  
They just append that string to files they create (kernel and symbolmap) 
and the /lib/modules directory.  (For the init thingy, I assume you 
would give dracut that name - the exact name of the kernel to boot in 
/boot, and it makes an init thingy with a matching name.  It was 
genkernel where I was talking about things changing - and yes, genkernel 
changed it's basic kernel naming conventions a few months back, but that 
was clearly a big change, and there was a news item about it, if I 
remember.  If you are only or mostly recompiling the kernel after 
changing config settings, it's trivial to change LOCALVERSION from -01 
to -02 at the same time.
>>>>> 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.
>> You don't boot from an encrypted drive (yet) or use unusual hardware,
>> that's what I meant by a plain system. Dracut handles booting from a a
>> btrfs root on a LUKS encrypted block device here with no fancy
>> configuration. It really is impressive the way it figures so much out for
>> itself.
>
> What I meant was, I don't use make install because I do things
> differently than make install does.  It's not "plain" in that regard.
>
>
>>> 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.
>> I use a shell script to compile and install the kernel, build the
>> initramfs and then update the bootloader. It means the process is always
>> executed consistently and I only have to remember one command :)
>>
>>
>
>
> Well, we know my scripting ability isn't anywhere near that advanced. 
> Claiming I can do a basic script is a stretch.  ROFL When I do it
> manually, I get consistent results to and I know what steps were taken
> to get there.  My only problem is recalling the options for dracut.
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  :-)