[gentoo-user] make oldconfig necessary?

[gentoo-user] make oldconfig necessary?

[Pandu Poluan]

Let's say I have a .config from an older kernel version (for example,
2.6.38), and now I want to install a newer kernel (let's say, 3.0).

Is it necessary to first do `make oldconfig`, or is it safe to go
directly to `make menuconfig`?

Rgds,


-- 
--
Pandu E Poluan - IT Optimizer
My website: http://pandu.poluan.info/

Re: [gentoo-user] make oldconfig necessary?

[Jeremy McSpadden]

Better to run make oldconfig. It merges the changes.

--
Jeremy McSpadden
deface@uberpenguin.net




On Jul 31, 2011, at 9:06 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote:

> Let's say I have a .config from an older kernel version (for example,
> 2.6.38), and now I want to install a newer kernel (let's say, 3.0).
> 
> Is it necessary to first do `make oldconfig`, or is it safe to go
> directly to `make menuconfig`?
> 
> Rgds,
> 
> 
> -- 
> --
> Pandu E Poluan - IT Optimizer
> My website: http://pandu.poluan.info/
> 
> 
> 

Re: [gentoo-user] make oldconfig necessary?

[Dale]

Jeremy McSpadden wrote:
> Better to run make oldconfig. It merges the changes.
>
> --
> Jeremy McSpadden
> deface@uberpenguin.net
>
>    

Yep.  I always run make oldconfig then just run make && make 
modules_install.  Once oldconfig is done, the kernel should be 
configured and ready to build.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] make oldconfig necessary?

[Mark Knecht]

On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 7:06 PM, Pandu Poluan <pandu@poluan.info> wrote:
> Let's say I have a .config from an older kernel version (for example,
> 2.6.38), and now I want to install a newer kernel (let's say, 3.0).
>
> Is it necessary to first do `make oldconfig`, or is it safe to go
> directly to `make menuconfig`?
>
> Rgds,

It is not necessary but you'll be starting from scratch. Linux often
suggests that's the best thing to do but I've done make oldconfig for
12 years now and never had a problem that I could trace back to using
it. It certainly saves time.

I also ALWAYS run make menuconfig following make oldconfig mainly so I
can exit from menuconfig and get messages (if any) about config
problems.

Hope this helps,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] make oldconfig necessary?

[Bill Longman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 365 bytes --]

On Jul 31, 2011 7:06 PM, "Pandu Poluan" <pandu@poluan.info> wrote:
>
> Let's say I have a .config from an older kernel version (for example,
> 2.6.38), and now I want to install a newer kernel (let's say, 3.0).
>
> Is it necessary to first do `make oldconfig`, or is it safe to go
> directly to `make menuconfig`?
>

You may also want to try "make silentoldconfig"

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 510 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] make oldconfig necessary?

[Albert Hopkins]

On Sunday, July 31 at 21:23 (-0500), Jeremy McSpadden said:

> Better to run make oldconfig. It merges the changes.
> 
> --
> Jeremy McSpadden
> deface@uberpenguin.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jul 31, 2011, at 9:06 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote:
> 
> > Let's say I have a .config from an older kernel version (for example,
> > 2.6.38), and now I want to install a newer kernel (let's say, 3.0).
> > 
> > Is it necessary to first do `make oldconfig`, or is it safe to go
> > directly to `make menuconfig`?
> > 

Agreed, although it should be possible to go straight to menuconfig,
what I think that does is basically says 'n' to all the changes, and you
never get to see what you said no to.  (Unless you have a *very* good
memory and peruse though everything in menuconfig (but that isn't
entirely correct either since some menu options will not be visible
since you implicitly said not to them).

Usually, I just do an oldconfig after a kernel upgrade.  If I also need
to explicitly enable/disable something, then i do an oldconfig followed
by a menuconfig.

Re: [gentoo-user] make oldconfig necessary?

[David W Noon]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, 1 Aug 2011 09:06:17 +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote about
"[gentoo-user] make oldconfig necessary?":

>Let's say I have a .config from an older kernel version (for example,
>2.6.38), and now I want to install a newer kernel (let's say, 3.0).
>
>Is it necessary to first do `make oldconfig`, or is it safe to go
>directly to `make menuconfig`?

For some years now, make menuconfig has performed a silent make
oldconfig before it brings up the menu.  I stopped using make oldconfig
in about 2007, after I was confident that the change to make menuconfig
was working.
- -- 
Regards,

Dave  [RLU #314465]
======================================================================
dwnoon@ntlworld.com (David W Noon)
======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAk42lHgACgkQRQ2Fs59Psv8qGwCeMv0fJ2mF8WcPm620U3m2iM5Y
usYAnR2lUFi2jgBCmLDOIqAEZ22tzM7m
=uV/i
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[gentoo-user] Re: make oldconfig necessary?

[Grant Edwards]

On 2011-08-01, Pandu Poluan <pandu@poluan.info> wrote:
> Let's say I have a .config from an older kernel version (for example,
> 2.6.38), and now I want to install a newer kernel (let's say, 3.0).
>
> Is it necessary to first do `make oldconfig`, or is it safe to go
> directly to `make menuconfig`?

It's always safe to do 'make menuconfig', and always has been (at
least since the 0.97 days when I started running Linux).  You just
have to select all the options correctly.

All that 'make oldconfig' does is start you out with something as
close to your old kernel configuration as possible.

-- 
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! CHUBBY CHECKER just
                                  at               had a CHICKEN SANDWICH in
                              gmail.com            downtown DULUTH!

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: make oldconfig necessary?

[Michael Mol]

On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Grant Edwards
<grant.b.edwards@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2011-08-01, Pandu Poluan <pandu@poluan.info> wrote:
>> Let's say I have a .config from an older kernel version (for example,
>> 2.6.38), and now I want to install a newer kernel (let's say, 3.0).
>>
>> Is it necessary to first do `make oldconfig`, or is it safe to go
>> directly to `make menuconfig`?
>
> It's always safe to do 'make menuconfig', and always has been (at
> least since the 0.97 days when I started running Linux).  You just
> have to select all the options correctly.
>
> All that 'make oldconfig' does is start you out with something as
> close to your old kernel configuration as possible.

Which is an incredible timesaver...I hope I never forget to keep the
"/proc/config.gz" option enabled again.
-- 
:wq

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: make oldconfig necessary?

[Pandu Poluan]

On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 21:09, Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2011-08-01, Pandu Poluan <pandu@poluan.info> wrote:
>> Let's say I have a .config from an older kernel version (for example,
>> 2.6.38), and now I want to install a newer kernel (let's say, 3.0).
>>
>> Is it necessary to first do `make oldconfig`, or is it safe to go
>> directly to `make menuconfig`?
>
> It's always safe to do 'make menuconfig', and always has been (at
> least since the 0.97 days when I started running Linux).  You just
> have to select all the options correctly.
>
> All that 'make oldconfig' does is start you out with something as
> close to your old kernel configuration as possible.
>

Sorry for the misunderstanding, my bad.

What I meant was:

If I want a kernel config as close as possible to the older kernel,
can I just use `make menuconfig`, or do I have to first run `make
oldconfig`.

Again, sorry for the confusion.

Rgds,
-- 
Pandu E Poluan
~ IT Optimizer ~

 • Blog : http://pepoluan.tumblr.com
 • Linked-In : http://id.linkedin.com/in/pepoluan

Re: [gentoo-user] make oldconfig necessary?

[kashani]

On 7/31/2011 7:06 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote:
> Let's say I have a .config from an older kernel version (for example,
> 2.6.38), and now I want to install a newer kernel (let's say, 3.0).
>
> Is it necessary to first do `make oldconfig`, or is it safe to go
> directly to `make menuconfig`?

Necessary to run make old config? No.

Easier and simpler most of the time? Yes.

I like to make a fresh kernel from scratch every year or so without any 
previous settings to keep the cruft out. I last did it for my vbox image 
figuring I was going to need to very little hardware support so starting 
fresh made sense.

kashani

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: make oldconfig necessary?

[David W Noon]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 958 bytes --]

On Mon, 1 Aug 2011 21:39:29 +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote about Re:
[gentoo-user] Re: make oldconfig necessary?:

> What I meant was:
> 
> If I want a kernel config as close as possible to the older kernel,
> can I just use `make menuconfig`, or do I have to first run `make
> oldconfig`.

Just copy your old .config file to the new kernel source directory, then
run make menuconfig and select what you want.  Job done.

The make menuconfig will silently do a make oldconfig on the
existing .config file before it puts the menu on the screen.  This
means that the options in the menu hierarchy will reflect the options
that were in your old .config file, with newer features [i.e. not in the
earlier kernel] set to defaults.
-- 
Regards,

Dave  [RLU #314465]
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
dwnoon@ntlworld.com (David W Noon)
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

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

Re: [gentoo-user] make oldconfig necessary?

[Michael Orlitzky]

On 08/01/2011 12:00 PM, kashani wrote:
> On 7/31/2011 7:06 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote:
>> Let's say I have a .config from an older kernel version (for example,
>> 2.6.38), and now I want to install a newer kernel (let's say, 3.0).
>>
>> Is it necessary to first do `make oldconfig`, or is it safe to go
>> directly to `make menuconfig`?
> 
> Necessary to run make old config? No.
> 
> Easier and simpler most of the time? Yes.
> 

Use oldconfig. Running 'oldconfig' will prompt you for any new
sections/drivers that have appeared since your last kernel. Running
'menuconfig' will silently accept all of the defaults for these new options.

Why is it safer if only the new stuff gets defaulted? Because on more
than one occasion, there has been a group of drivers, e.g. wireless
chipsets, that got a new "enable anything" option. So while you may have
had your Atheros chipset enabled in the old kernel, the new kernel has a
"enable wireless networking" option that defaults to "no" despite the
fact that your old kernel had one or more wireless chipsets enabled.

This also happened with the entire SATA subsystem, resulting in at least
one extra trip to the office for me. I'm not bitter, though.

[gentoo-user] Re: make oldconfig necessary?

[Grant Edwards]

On 2011-08-01, Michael Orlitzky <michael@orlitzky.com> wrote:

> Use oldconfig. Running 'oldconfig' will prompt you for any new
> sections/drivers that have appeared since your last kernel. Running
> 'menuconfig' will silently accept all of the defaults for these new
> options.
>
> Why is it safer if only the new stuff gets defaulted? Because on more
> than one occasion, there has been a group of drivers, e.g. wireless
> chipsets, that got a new "enable anything" option. So while you may
> have had your Atheros chipset enabled in the old kernel, the new
> kernel has a "enable wireless networking" option that defaults to
> "no" despite the fact that your old kernel had one or more wireless
> chipsets enabled.
>
> This also happened with the entire SATA subsystem,

Been there, tripped over that. ;)

I didn't pay close enough attention when running "make oldconfig" and
suddenly no hard-drives with the new kernel.  It took me an
embarassingly long time to figure out what had gone wrong...

-- 
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! Did an Italian CRANE
                                  at               OPERATOR just experience
                              gmail.com            uninhibited sensations in
                                                   a MALIBU HOT TUB?

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: make oldconfig necessary?

[Peter Humphrey]

On Monday 01 August 2011 17:58:18 David W Noon wrote:

> The make menuconfig will silently do a make oldconfig on the
> existing .config file before it puts the menu on the screen.  This
> means that the options in the menu hierarchy will reflect the options
> that were in your old .config file, with newer features [i.e. not in the
> earlier kernel] set to defaults.

...and flagged with "(NEW)" so you can see them.

-- 
Rgds
Peter		Linux Counter 5290, 1994-04-23