[gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Walter Dnes]

  Today is when running a lilo menu with "production" and "experimental"
kernels saved me.  "production" is 2.6.30-r8.  "experimental" is
2.6.31-r6 or 2.6.31-r10 (same problems with either one).  I set
/usr/src/linux to point at 2.6.31-r6 (or 10), copied .config from
2.6.30-r8 and ran "make oldconfig".  I got the warnings listed below
before the config process started.  "make oldconfig" appears to have
reset to default values, and it was showing me some settings totally the
opposite of what I know I've set.  When I ran through "make oldconfig",
compiled and rebooted, I got a framebuffer console, which I *KNOW* I
haven't selected.  And there was a kernel panic because gentoo couldn't
find the boot device.

  I'm enough of a bit-twiddler that I can set up the kernel manually.
But I know from past experience that it's a long slow process.  Is
there any trick to salvage "make oldconfig", before I resort to setting
up the kernel "the hard way"?  Here's the output from "make oldconfig"
up to where it starts asking questions...


[d531][root][/usr/src/linux] make oldconfig
  HOSTCC  scripts/basic/fixdep
  HOSTCC  scripts/basic/docproc
  HOSTCC  scripts/basic/hash
  HOSTCC  scripts/kconfig/conf.o
scripts/kconfig/conf.c: In function 'conf_askvalue':
scripts/kconfig/conf.c:105: warning: ignoring return value of 'fgets', declared with attribute warn_unused_result
scripts/kconfig/conf.c: In function 'conf_choice':
scripts/kconfig/conf.c:307: warning: ignoring return value of 'fgets', declared with attribute warn_unused_result
  HOSTCC  scripts/kconfig/kxgettext.o
  SHIPPED scripts/kconfig/zconf.tab.c
  SHIPPED scripts/kconfig/lex.zconf.c
  SHIPPED scripts/kconfig/zconf.hash.c
  HOSTCC  scripts/kconfig/zconf.tab.o
In file included from scripts/kconfig/zconf.tab.c:2486:
scripts/kconfig/confdata.c: In function 'conf_write':
scripts/kconfig/confdata.c:508: warning: ignoring return value of 'fwrite', declared with attribute warn_unused_result
scripts/kconfig/confdata.c: In function 'conf_write_autoconf':
scripts/kconfig/confdata.c:745: warning: ignoring return value of 'fwrite', declared with attribute warn_unused_result
scripts/kconfig/confdata.c:746: warning: ignoring return value of 'fwrite', declared with attribute warn_unused_result
In file included from scripts/kconfig/zconf.tab.c:2487:
scripts/kconfig/expr.c: In function 'expr_print_file_helper':
scripts/kconfig/expr.c:1090: warning: ignoring return value of 'fwrite', declared with attribute warn_unused_result
  HOSTLD  scripts/kconfig/conf
scripts/kconfig/conf -o arch/x86/Kconfig
*
* Restart config...
*
*
* Performance Counters
*
Kernel Performance Counters (PERF_COUNTERS) [N/y/?] (NEW)


-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Kaddeh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3416 bytes --]

Walter,

I'd advise going back through and running a "make menuconfig" on
2.6.31-r6/10 and verify that everything is in order.
The reason that I say this is that, in the event that your kernel -DID-
revert back to defaults, if you have a non-ext2/3 partition, it isn't going
t recognize it (EXT4, Reiserfs3.6/4, etc aren't "default" options).
As for the warnings that you are talking about, those have existed for a
while, they are obviously non-fatal and not really pertinent to your issue
at hand.

Cheers

Kad

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org> wrote:

>  Today is when running a lilo menu with "production" and "experimental"
> kernels saved me.  "production" is 2.6.30-r8.  "experimental" is
> 2.6.31-r6 or 2.6.31-r10 (same problems with either one).  I set
> /usr/src/linux to point at 2.6.31-r6 (or 10), copied .config from
> 2.6.30-r8 and ran "make oldconfig".  I got the warnings listed below
> before the config process started.  "make oldconfig" appears to have
> reset to default values, and it was showing me some settings totally the
> opposite of what I know I've set.  When I ran through "make oldconfig",
> compiled and rebooted, I got a framebuffer console, which I *KNOW* I
> haven't selected.  And there was a kernel panic because gentoo couldn't
> find the boot device.
>
>  I'm enough of a bit-twiddler that I can set up the kernel manually.
> But I know from past experience that it's a long slow process.  Is
> there any trick to salvage "make oldconfig", before I resort to setting
> up the kernel "the hard way"?  Here's the output from "make oldconfig"
> up to where it starts asking questions...
>
>
> [d531][root][/usr/src/linux] make oldconfig
>  HOSTCC  scripts/basic/fixdep
>  HOSTCC  scripts/basic/docproc
>  HOSTCC  scripts/basic/hash
>  HOSTCC  scripts/kconfig/conf.o
> scripts/kconfig/conf.c: In function 'conf_askvalue':
> scripts/kconfig/conf.c:105: warning: ignoring return value of 'fgets',
> declared with attribute warn_unused_result
> scripts/kconfig/conf.c: In function 'conf_choice':
> scripts/kconfig/conf.c:307: warning: ignoring return value of 'fgets',
> declared with attribute warn_unused_result
>  HOSTCC  scripts/kconfig/kxgettext.o
>  SHIPPED scripts/kconfig/zconf.tab.c
>  SHIPPED scripts/kconfig/lex.zconf.c
>  SHIPPED scripts/kconfig/zconf.hash.c
>  HOSTCC  scripts/kconfig/zconf.tab.o
> In file included from scripts/kconfig/zconf.tab.c:2486:
> scripts/kconfig/confdata.c: In function 'conf_write':
> scripts/kconfig/confdata.c:508: warning: ignoring return value of 'fwrite',
> declared with attribute warn_unused_result
> scripts/kconfig/confdata.c: In function 'conf_write_autoconf':
> scripts/kconfig/confdata.c:745: warning: ignoring return value of 'fwrite',
> declared with attribute warn_unused_result
> scripts/kconfig/confdata.c:746: warning: ignoring return value of 'fwrite',
> declared with attribute warn_unused_result
> In file included from scripts/kconfig/zconf.tab.c:2487:
> scripts/kconfig/expr.c: In function 'expr_print_file_helper':
> scripts/kconfig/expr.c:1090: warning: ignoring return value of 'fwrite',
> declared with attribute warn_unused_result
>  HOSTLD  scripts/kconfig/conf
> scripts/kconfig/conf -o arch/x86/Kconfig
> *
> * Restart config...
> *
> *
> * Performance Counters
> *
> Kernel Performance Counters (PERF_COUNTERS) [N/y/?] (NEW)
>
>
> --
> Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4199 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Tanstaafl]

On 2010-03-09 8:36 PM, Walter Dnes wrote:
> Today is when running a lilo menu with "production" and "experimental"
> kernels saved me.  "production" is 2.6.30-r8.  "experimental" is
> 2.6.31-r6 or 2.6.31-r10 (same problems with either one).  I set
> /usr/src/linux to point at 2.6.31-r6 (or 10), copied .config from
> 2.6.30-r8 and ran "make oldconfig".

I *never* use make oldconfig between major kernel versions...

I do as the kernel upgrade guide says - when going between major
versions (yes, even one), copy the old .config to the new kernel dir,
then run make menuconfig, and make sure all of your critical options are
set. This is much safer, though it does take more time.

I've been wondering though - how well does genkernel work now? I've
never used it...

-- 

Charles

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Dale]

Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 2010-03-09 8:36 PM, Walter Dnes wrote:
>    
>> Today is when running a lilo menu with "production" and "experimental"
>> kernels saved me.  "production" is 2.6.30-r8.  "experimental" is
>> 2.6.31-r6 or 2.6.31-r10 (same problems with either one).  I set
>> /usr/src/linux to point at 2.6.31-r6 (or 10), copied .config from
>> 2.6.30-r8 and ran "make oldconfig".
>>      
> I *never* use make oldconfig between major kernel versions...
>
> I do as the kernel upgrade guide says - when going between major
> versions (yes, even one), copy the old .config to the new kernel dir,
> then run make menuconfig, and make sure all of your critical options are
> set. This is much safer, though it does take more time.
>
> I've been wondering though - how well does genkernel work now? I've
> never used it...
>
>    

I use make oldconfig all the time and have only had problems with it 
once.  I would trust make oldconfig looong before I would even think to 
trust genkernel.  I have never got it to work for me.

Using make oldconfig should be fine for the OP.  I wouldn't use it if I 
were going from 2.6.1* to a current version tho.  It would be faster to 
start from scratch.  That would be a lot of questions to answer.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Tanstaafl]

On 2010-03-10 8:38 AM, Dale wrote:
> I use make oldconfig all the time and have only had problems with it
> once.  I would trust make oldconfig looong before I would even think to
> trust genkernel.  I have never got it to work for me.
> 
> Using make oldconfig should be fine for the OP.

My point is, the recommended method per the official gentoo docs/kernel
upgrade guide is, using make oldconfig is only recommended for minor
bumps of the same kernel version, and for major updates - and again,
yes, even going from 2.6.30 to 2.6.31 is a 'major' update, copying the
old .config then doing make menuconfig is the preferred/recommended way.

If you want to live dangerously, that is fine, but please do not ignore
the fact that it is *not* the *recommended/preferred* - ie *safest* - way.

-- 

Charles

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 683 bytes --]

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 08:22:41 -0500, Tanstaafl wrote:

> > Today is when running a lilo menu with "production" and "experimental"
> > kernels saved me.  "production" is 2.6.30-r8.  "experimental" is
> > 2.6.31-r6 or 2.6.31-r10 (same problems with either one).  I set
> > /usr/src/linux to point at 2.6.31-r6 (or 10), copied .config from
> > 2.6.30-r8 and ran "make oldconfig".  
> 
> I *never* use make oldconfig between major kernel versions...

The .30, .31 is the minor kernel version. You shouldn't use oldconfig
when going from 2.4 to 2.6 but from 2.6.m to 2.6.n is safe.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Anything is possible if you don't know what
you are talking about.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Mick]

On 10 March 2010 01:36, Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org> wrote:
>  Today is when running a lilo menu with "production" and "experimental"
> kernels saved me.  "production" is 2.6.30-r8.  "experimental" is
> 2.6.31-r6 or 2.6.31-r10 (same problems with either one).  I set
> /usr/src/linux to point at 2.6.31-r6 (or 10), copied .config from
> 2.6.30-r8 and ran "make oldconfig".  I got the warnings listed below
> before the config process started.  "make oldconfig" appears to have
> reset to default values, and it was showing me some settings totally the
> opposite of what I know I've set.  When I ran through "make oldconfig",
> compiled and rebooted, I got a framebuffer console, which I *KNOW* I
> haven't selected.

If you had not enabled framebuffer in your old kernel then I can't
think how it would show up as enabled in your new kernel (as far as I
know fb is not enabled by default on any kernels that I've ever built)

> And there was a kernel panic because gentoo couldn't
> find the boot device.

Hmm ... so it's not just framebuffer but different filesystems perhaps?

>  I'm enough of a bit-twiddler that I can set up the kernel manually.
> But I know from past experience that it's a long slow process.  Is
> there any trick to salvage "make oldconfig", before I resort to setting
> up the kernel "the hard way"?  Here's the output from "make oldconfig"
> up to where it starts asking questions...

The errors you show are not show stoppers (or the new kernel would not
build).  You may want to update your gcc and then check using
gcc-config that the latest is being used.

With regards to your kernel panic I suspect an error in the .config
file you copied over.  Do you keep a copy both in
/usr/src/linux-gentoo-XXX/ and in /boot?  If yes then copy over your
.config from a different location this time, otherwise you'll have to
go about it through the manual method.

PS.  Just checking the obvious:  you aren't manually patching your
kernels and forgot to do it this time, right?
-- 
Regards,
Mick

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Tanstaafl]

On 2010-03-10 8:47 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 08:22:41 -0500, Tanstaafl wrote:
> 
>>> Today is when running a lilo menu with "production" and "experimental"
>>> kernels saved me.  "production" is 2.6.30-r8.  "experimental" is
>>> 2.6.31-r6 or 2.6.31-r10 (same problems with either one).  I set
>>> /usr/src/linux to point at 2.6.31-r6 (or 10), copied .config from
>>> 2.6.30-r8 and ran "make oldconfig".  
>>
>> I *never* use make oldconfig between major kernel versions...
> 
> The .30, .31 is the minor kernel version. You shouldn't use oldconfig
> when going from 2.4 to 2.6 but from 2.6.m to 2.6.n is safe.

Again, not according to the official upgrade guide - it specifically
uses 2.6.9-r1 to 2.6.9-r2 as an example of a 'minor' update, and going
from 2.6.8 to 2.6.9 as having potentially 'too large of changes for make
oldconfig to be considered safe'.

If the guide is outdated, maybe it should be updated:

http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/kernel-upgrade.xml#doc_chap10

"10.  Advanced: Using your old kernel .config to configure a new one

It is sometimes possible to save time by re-using the configuration file
from your old kernel when configuring the new one. Note that this is
generally unsafe -- too many changes between every kernel release for
this to be a reliable upgrade path.

The only situation where this is appropriate is when upgrading from one
Gentoo kernel revision to another. For example, the changes made between
gentoo-sources-2.6.9-r1 and gentoo-sources-2.6.9-r2 will be very small,
so it is usually OK to use the following method. However, it is not
appropriate to use it in the example used throughout this document:
upgrading from 2.6.8 to 2.6.9. Too many changes between the official
releases, and the method described below does not display enough context
to the user, often resulting in the user running into problems because
they disabled options that they really didn't want to.

To reuse your old .config, you simply need to copy it over and then run
make oldconfig. In the following example, we take the configuration from
gentoo-sources-2.6.9-r1 and import it into gentoo-sources-2.6.9-r2.

Code Listing 10.1: Reusing your old config

# cd /usr/src/linux-2.6.9-gentoo-r2
# cp ../linux-2.6.9-gentoo-r1/.config .
# make oldconfig

<snip>

At this point, you may be asked to produce answers for configuration
options which have changed between the two versions. Once you have done
that, you can compile and install your kernel as normal, without having
to go through the menuconfig configuration process.

A much safer upgrading method is to copy your config as previously
shown, and then simply run make menuconfig. This avoids the problems of
make oldconfig mentioned previously, as make menuconfig will load up
your previous configuration as much as possible into the menu. Now all
you have to do is go through each option and look for new sections,
removals, and so on. By using menuconfig, you gain context for all the
new changes, and can easily view the new choices and review help screens
much easier. You can even use this for upgrades such as 2.6.8 to 2.6.9;
just make sure you read through the options carefully. Once you've
finished, compile and install your kernel as normal."

-- 

Charles

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Alan McKinnon]

On Wednesday 10 March 2010 15:22:41 Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 2010-03-09 8:36 PM, Walter Dnes wrote:
> > Today is when running a lilo menu with "production" and "experimental"
> > kernels saved me.  "production" is 2.6.30-r8.  "experimental" is
> > 2.6.31-r6 or 2.6.31-r10 (same problems with either one).  I set
> > /usr/src/linux to point at 2.6.31-r6 (or 10), copied .config from
> > 2.6.30-r8 and ran "make oldconfig".
> 
> I *never* use make oldconfig between major kernel versions...

A major kernel upgrade is from 2.6 to 2.7

2.6.30 to 2.6.31 is a small incremental upgrade and
2.6.30.1 to 2.6.30.2 is a bug fix

Common sense tells me that you will forget something important using your 
method much more often than oldconfig will trip over a new option (eg the pata 
shuffle about 2 years ago)

> I do as the kernel upgrade guide says - when going between major
> versions (yes, even one), copy the old .config to the new kernel dir,
> then run make menuconfig, and make sure all of your critical options are
> set. This is much safer, though it does take more time.

Well, that guide is someone's opinion. It is not a technical fact.

I write wiki pages that seem to be to be 100% spot on and the best advice 
ever. But some of my colleagues ignore it and do it their way. Stuff they do 
does not break.



-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Alan McKinnon]

On Wednesday 10 March 2010 15:46:03 Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 2010-03-10 8:38 AM, Dale wrote:
> > I use make oldconfig all the time and have only had problems with it
> > once.  I would trust make oldconfig looong before I would even think to
> > trust genkernel.  I have never got it to work for me.
> > 
> > Using make oldconfig should be fine for the OP.
> 
> My point is, the recommended method per the official gentoo docs/kernel
> upgrade guide is


Let me correct you on your misunderstanding:

The current opinion of the current author of the kernel upgrade guide says 
what you quoted.

It's his opinion, it's what he thinks will work best for the majority of 
people. It's probably also the wording that has been proven to result in the 
least bugzilla entries and the fewest mails in his inbox from the "Help me!" 
mob.

It's not a technical data sheet, and what you quote is not a fact


> , using make oldconfig is only recommended for minor
> bumps of the same kernel version, and for major updates - and again,
> yes, even going from 2.6.30 to 2.6.31 is a 'major' update, copying the
> old .config then doing make menuconfig is the preferred/recommended way.
> 
> If you want to live dangerously, that is fine, but please do not ignore
> the fact that it is *not* the *recommended/preferred* - ie *safest* - way.

Wrong. See above.

How do I know this? I too write technical docs. I too write them to minimize 
the size of my inbox. Do you think for a minute I actually *follow* the advice 
of give to others less knowledgeable than myself?



-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1186 bytes --]

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 08:56:24 -0500, Tanstaafl wrote:

> > The .30, .31 is the minor kernel version. You shouldn't use oldconfig
> > when going from 2.4 to 2.6 but from 2.6.m to 2.6.n is safe.  
> 
> Again, not according to the official upgrade guide - it specifically
> uses 2.6.9-r1 to 2.6.9-r2 as an example of a 'minor' update, and going
> from 2.6.8 to 2.6.9 as having potentially 'too large of changes for make
> oldconfig to be considered safe'.
> 
> If the guide is outdated, maybe it should be updated:

Whatever the guide says, the third part of the kernel version is
considered the minor revision, anything after that is a patch level.

I see what you mean about the guide and consider it wrong, especially for
an advanced section. You are more likely to run into problems when not
reusing your old config that when using make oldconfig. Even the comment
about context isn't really true, as oldconfig shows some context and the
same help that menuconfig does.

My only complaint about oldconfig is that there is no way to step back or
undo a change, short of Ctrl-C and start again.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Top Oxymorons Number 43: Genuine imitation

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Mick]

On 10 March 2010 13:56, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@libertytrek.org> wrote:
> On 2010-03-10 8:47 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 08:22:41 -0500, Tanstaafl wrote:
>>
>>>> Today is when running a lilo menu with "production" and "experimental"
>>>> kernels saved me.  "production" is 2.6.30-r8.  "experimental" is
>>>> 2.6.31-r6 or 2.6.31-r10 (same problems with either one).  I set
>>>> /usr/src/linux to point at 2.6.31-r6 (or 10), copied .config from
>>>> 2.6.30-r8 and ran "make oldconfig".
>>>
>>> I *never* use make oldconfig between major kernel versions...
>>
>> The .30, .31 is the minor kernel version. You shouldn't use oldconfig
>> when going from 2.4 to 2.6 but from 2.6.m to 2.6.n is safe.
>
> Again, not according to the official upgrade guide - it specifically
> uses 2.6.9-r1 to 2.6.9-r2 as an example of a 'minor' update, and going
> from 2.6.8 to 2.6.9 as having potentially 'too large of changes for make
> oldconfig to be considered safe'.
>
> If the guide is outdated, maybe it should be updated:
>
> http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/kernel-upgrade.xml#doc_chap10

Charles, I've been using make oldconfig since 2004.  It has never
failed me.  You soon realise if the new kernel has significant changes
from the old one (i.e. if modules have moved between sections, etc.)
In that case, when you complete your make oldconfig you can fire up
make menuconfig and revisit the new areas just to make double sure you
haven't missed anything important.

Now, doing that for the first time may be too confusing for someone
who is not familiar with the process of rolling up their own kernel,
therefore the handbook has to cater for the lowest common denominator
and advises to go about it in a long-winded way.

PS.  make oldconfig is essentially the result of a diff-ing exercise
between old/new kernels.  Using "?" helps explain new options before
you choose to select them.
-- 
Regards,
Mick

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Tanstaafl]

On 2010-03-10 9:07 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> The current opinion of the current author of the kernel upgrade
> guide says what you quoted.
> 
> It's his opinion, it's what he thinks will work best for the
> majority of people. It's probably also the wording that has been
> proven to result in the least bugzilla entries and the fewest mails
> in his inbox from the "Help me!" mob.

It is either a part of the *official* gentoo documentation, or it isn't.

My understanding is that it is. Is that incorrect?

In other words, it is not $random_guide found on the internet somewhere,
nor is it some gentoo dev's private wiki, it is formal, official gentoo
documentation - and that *is* a fact.

If what you say is true, then I guess every single page of every single
bit of gentoo documentation should come with a big fat warning that
'this is just someone's personal opinion, so don't give it any weight
whatsoever - hey, just do your own thang!'...

-- 

Charles

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Tanstaafl]

On 2010-03-10 9:09 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> Whatever the guide says, the third part of the kernel version is 
> considered the minor revision, anything after that is a patch level.

Gotcha - and I guess I was using those terms in my own way - the guide
didn't use the word major or minor - I just added that to distinguish
between the two cases...

> I see what you mean about the guide and consider it wrong, especially
> for an advanced section. You are more likely to run into problems
> when not reusing your old config that when using make oldconfig.

But... my understanding is that, by copying your old .config to the new
kernel dir before running make menuconfig, you *are* reusing your old
config... I sure hope I'm not reading *that* wrong. ;)

> Even the comment about context isn't really true, as oldconfig shows
> some context and the same help that menuconfig does.

Ok... well, this is how I've always done it, and I'm comfortable with
it, so don't see a reason to change.

Maybe I'll try running make oldconfig one day just to see how it differs...

Anyway, thanks for the info.

Lastly - since the guide *is* a part of the formal/official gentoo docs,
maybe one of you who understands the kernel update process should file a
bug to update it with better information?

-- 

Charles

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1315 bytes --]

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 09:27:19 -0500, Tanstaafl wrote:

> > I see what you mean about the guide and consider it wrong, especially
> > for an advanced section. You are more likely to run into problems
> > when not reusing your old config that when using make oldconfig.  
> 
> But... my understanding is that, by copying your old .config to the new
> kernel dir before running make menuconfig, you *are* reusing your old
> config... I sure hope I'm not reading *that* wrong. ;)

No you're not. But it is far easier to miss important changes without
oldconfig to point them out to you by shoving them in your face.
> 
> > Even the comment about context isn't really true, as oldconfig shows
> > some context and the same help that menuconfig does.  
> 
> Ok... well, this is how I've always done it, and I'm comfortable with
> it, so don't see a reason to change.

Each to their own.

> Maybe I'll try running make oldconfig one day just to see how it
> differs...

It's not black magic, it just shows you any new options that are not
present in your config, offers you choices along with a default and a
chance to read the help text for that option. If you're feeling paranoid,
diff the config it generates with the one you started with.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

BING But It's Not Google

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 602 bytes --]

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 14:09:25 +0000, Mick wrote:

> Now, doing that for the first time may be too confusing for someone
> who is not familiar with the process of rolling up their own kernel,
> therefore the handbook has to cater for the lowest common denominator
> and advises to go about it in a long-winded way.

Which should not be the case in a section of the documentation marked
"Advanced". This is advanced in Gentoo user terms, not like Ubuntu users
where it means they can manage joined up writing :)


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Tanstaafl]

On 2010-03-10 9:35 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 09:27:19 -0500, Tanstaafl wrote:
>> But... my understanding is that, by copying your old .config to the
>> new kernel dir before running make menuconfig, you *are* reusing
>> your old config... I sure hope I'm not reading *that* wrong. ;)

> No you're not. But it is far easier to miss important changes
> without oldconfig to point them out to you by shoving them in your
> face.

Interesting - in that case, I'd have to agree with you and Alan that
using make oldconfig sounds like it would be better, and that the guide,
official though it may be, is wrong.

Apologies, Alan, for being a little argumentative - its just that I'm a
stickler for always telling people to use 'official' docs as opposed to
$random_guide found on the internet, since it should always be 'right'.

On 2010-03-10 9:37 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 14:09:25 +0000, Mick wrote:
>> Now, doing that for the first time may be too confusing for
>> someone who is not familiar with the process of rolling up their
>> own kernel, therefore the handbook has to cater for the lowest
>> common denominator and advises to go about it in a long-winded
>> way.

> Which should not be the case in a section of the documentation
> marked "Advanced". This is advanced in Gentoo user terms, not like
> Ubuntu users where it means they can manage joined up writing :)

Heh... agree 100%. In fact, the way it is worded does seem to actually
be technically *wrong*, if it does indeed do the same thing as make
menuconfig wrt reusing as much of your old config as possible. I would
consider the 'shoving the differences in your face' aspect to be much
more beneficial too. I probably would have avoided the problem I ran
into back when they changed the netfilter options - I can't remember
exactly, but I think they changed some of the option names and/or where
they were located in the kernel config... all I know is my firewall
wouldn't work until I googled the changes and recompiled my kernel.

So, if no one else (who understands kernel compiling better than me -
which would probably be most everyone here) wants to open a bug to fix
the documentation/guide, I'll do it, but I think it might be received
better if it was made by someone familiar with both methods, but
especially make oldconfig...

-- 

Charles

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Paul Hartman]

On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 8:35 AM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> No you're not. But it is far easier to miss important changes without
> oldconfig to point them out to you by shoving them in your face.

That's how I use it. I do oldconfig as a kind of "kernel config diff"
and then follow it by menuconfig and a quick browsing of the critical
settings to make sure they look sane enough to boot. As long as it
boots and supports my disks and filesystems I can sort out any minor
settings/module changes after that.

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Alan McKinnon]

On Wednesday 10 March 2010 16:19:34 Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 2010-03-10 9:07 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > The current opinion of the current author of the kernel upgrade
> > guide says what you quoted.
> > 
> > It's his opinion, it's what he thinks will work best for the
> > majority of people. It's probably also the wording that has been
> > proven to result in the least bugzilla entries and the fewest mails
> > in his inbox from the "Help me!" mob.
> 
> It is either a part of the *official* gentoo documentation, or it isn't.
> 
> My understanding is that it is. Is that incorrect?
> 
> In other words, it is not $random_guide found on the internet somewhere,
> nor is it some gentoo dev's private wiki, it is formal, official gentoo
> documentation - and that *is* a fact.
> 
> If what you say is true, then I guess every single page of every single
> bit of gentoo documentation should come with a big fat warning that
> 'this is just someone's personal opinion, so don't give it any weight
> whatsoever - hey, just do your own thang!'...

You are twisting my words to mean something I did not say or mean or intend.

Please stop doing that.

Overall the docs are fine. That particular statement under discussion is bad 
advice as it implies something that is demonstrably not true.

Where did I say that all of the maintained official docs are low quality? I 
believe I said no such thing, nor implied it.


-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Walter Dnes]

On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 01:55:30PM +0000, Mick wrote

> If you had not enabled framebuffer in your old kernel then I can't
> think how it would show up as enabled in your new kernel (as far as I
> know fb is not enabled by default on any kernels that I've ever built)

  I'm running textmode console as I type this message.  I can tell the
difference between the font in this mode, versus the dinky font when
booting from the install CD.  I was getting the dinky font like the
install CD, with a lot more than 80 columns across.

> 
> > And there was a kernel panic because gentoo couldn't
> > find the boot device.
> 
> Hmm ... so it's not just framebuffer but different filesystems perhaps?

  I've got a 400 megabyte / (/dev/sda5) and the rest of the disk is
ReiserFS, with bindmounts for /opt, /var, /usr. and /tmp.  Here is part
of my /etc/fstab...

/dev/sda5               /               ext2            noatime 0 1
/dev/sda7               /home           reiserfs        noatime,notail 0 2
/home/bindmounts/opt    /opt            auto            bind 0 0
/home/bindmounts/var    /var            auto            bind 0 0
/home/bindmounts/usr    /usr            auto            bind 0 0
/home/bindmounts/tmp    /tmp            auto            bind 0 0

  Part of the output from "cat /proc/config.gz | gunzip | less"...

#
# File systems
#
CONFIG_EXT2_FS=y
CONFIG_EXT2_FS_XATTR=y
CONFIG_EXT2_FS_POSIX_ACL=y
# CONFIG_EXT2_FS_SECURITY is not set
# CONFIG_EXT2_FS_XIP is not set
# CONFIG_EXT3_FS is not set
# CONFIG_EXT4_FS is not set
CONFIG_FS_MBCACHE=y
CONFIG_REISERFS_FS=y
# CONFIG_REISERFS_CHECK is not set
# CONFIG_REISERFS_PROC_INFO is not set
CONFIG_REISERFS_FS_XATTR=y
CONFIG_REISERFS_FS_POSIX_ACL=y
# CONFIG_REISERFS_FS_SECURITY is not set
# CONFIG_JFS_FS is not set
CONFIG_FS_POSIX_ACL=y
# CONFIG_XFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_OCFS2_FS is not set
# CONFIG_BTRFS_FS is not set
CONFIG_FILE_LOCKING=y
CONFIG_DNOTIFY=y
CONFIG_INOTIFY=y
CONFIG_INOTIFY_USER=y
# CONFIG_QUOTA is not set
# CONFIG_AUTOFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_AUTOFS4_FS is not set
# CONFIG_FUSE_FS is not set

> With regards to your kernel panic I suspect an error in the .config
> file you copied over.  Do you keep a copy both in
> /usr/src/linux-gentoo-XXX/ and in /boot?  If yes then copy over your
> .config from a different location this time, otherwise you'll have to
> go about it through the manual method.

  I'll try "cat /proc/config.gz | gunzip > .config" and run oldconfig on
that instead.  And I'm running gcc-4.3.4, and it's the only gcc on my
system, and gcc-config agrees.

> PS.  Just checking the obvious:  you aren't manually patching your
> kernels and forgot to do it this time, right?

  Nope, nothing like that.

  PS, why isn't there a "gzcat" command in Gentoo?

-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 259 bytes --]

On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 08:03:21 -0500, Walter Dnes wrote:

>   PS, why isn't there a "gzcat" command in Gentoo?

Because it's called zcat.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Marriage is a relationship in which one person
is always right and the other is a husband

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Jonathan]

On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 08:03:21 -0500
"Walter Dnes" <waltdnes@waltdnes.org> wrote:

> PS, why isn't there a "gzcat" command in Gentoo?
It is "zcat" no g.

[gentoo-user] Re: [solved] Problem with "make oldconfig" 2.6.30-8 ==> 2.6.31

[Walter Dnes]

On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 01:55:30PM +0000, Mick wrote

> With regards to your kernel panic I suspect an error in the .config
> file you copied over.  Do you keep a copy both in
> /usr/src/linux-gentoo-XXX/ and in /boot?  If yes then copy over your
> .config from a different location this time, otherwise you'll have to
> go about it through the manual method.

  Thanks.  It looks like you were right about the file being corrupt.  I
ran "zcat /proc/config.gz > .config" and then "make oldconfig".  Things
went smoothly.  Unlike the previous run, oldconfig did *NOT* generate
any error/warning messages.  There were only a few items brought up by
oldconfig, mostly new device drivers.  The build and reboot went
smoothly, and now I'm...

[d531][waltdnes][~] uname -sr
Linux 2.6.31-gentoo-r10

  I'll follow my usual routine and wait a week or 2.  Unless I run into
problems, I'll promote 2.6.31-r10 to "production" then.

-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>