| 1 |
On Tue, 2 Oct 2007 13:22:07 +0800, Jed R. Mallen wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I don't really need the config files. As I've said I've been doing the |
| 4 |
> make oldconfig way before and I'm just wondering with the change of |
| 5 |
> kernel versions if this is still "safe" in any way. Thanks. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Yes it is. I've recycled my config files since 2.6.verysmallnumber with |
| 8 |
only one problem on one machine, the change of the SATA drivers. It |
| 9 |
shouldn't be used to change major revisions, say 2.4 to 2.6, and may |
| 10 |
cause problems with a large jump in minor revisions (but then such an |
| 11 |
upgrade is going to involve more work when you do it manually too). |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
As long as you keep a copy of your old kernel (make install does this |
| 14 |
automatically) you won't suffer if you do break the kernel. In some ways, |
| 15 |
the kernel is the easiest package to update, because it does not replace |
| 16 |
the previous version. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
-- |
| 20 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Committee (noun): A group of people spending hours taking minutes |
Archives