From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 254671381F3 for ; Sun, 31 Dec 2017 00:42:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2E23AE088C; Sun, 31 Dec 2017 00:42:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smarthost03c.mail.zen.net.uk (smarthost03c.mail.zen.net.uk [212.23.1.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB70BE0869 for ; Sun, 31 Dec 2017 00:42:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [82.69.80.10] (helo=peak.localnet) by smarthost03c.mail.zen.net.uk with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1eVRhn-0006FE-PF for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 31 Dec 2017 00:42:23 +0000 From: Peter Humphrey To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Kernel 4.14.7 no longer switches to VT7 Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2017 00:42:23 +0000 Message-ID: <1929480.VEiyYHLp7T@peak> In-Reply-To: <2024427.CpBGOPiNpi@peak> References: <7fd008d4-40a3-8f22-2ca2-841a9a11d1dc@gmail.com> <2024427.CpBGOPiNpi@peak> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Originating-smarthost03c-IP: [82.69.80.10] Feedback-ID: 82.69.80.10 X-Archives-Salt: 7bff3bd7-69fb-453e-947f-43589ab1d3df X-Archives-Hash: 2f7e1377854a0bc5b34922f114079797 On Sunday, 31 December 2017 00:33:34 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote: > On Saturday, 30 December 2017 00:18:12 GMT Alan McKinnon wrote: > > If you want to fix the bugs, then by all means soldier on. But if your > > intent is to have a working system that boots, probably drop using > > 4.14.x and go back to say 4.12.x ? > > But the whole 4.12 branch has been masked, so that won't do. Here, I've > had to go back to 4.9.49-r1 (amd64, not ~amd64). But now I see 4.9.72 has > been stabilised. Oops! That's on an x86 box. On this amd64 box the latest version is still 4.9.49-r1. > I think I'll wait for some stabiliity in the kernel > version offerings before I make another move. Three kernel compilations > on six systems within a week are a few too many. -- Regards, Peter.