> I tend to keep several builds of the same kernel version in /boot. I
> name them with a suffix to keep them straight example: linux-2.2.9mb5,
> linux-2.2.9mb6, linux-2.2.9mb7, etc. Each suffix is actually the
> build number from /usr/src/linux/.version with my initials.
> Occasionally I'll have names like linux-2.2.9ac3mb2 when using Alan's
> patches.
I tend to do the same, but I also change the 'EXTRAVERSION' value in the
root Makefile (before EXTRAVERSION was invented, I had a similar system of
my own).
This means that I can know exactly which kernel is running by looking at the
kernel version string (/proc/version, or 'uname -r'), and I can parse it for
whatever purposes (I usually don't, though).
The RedHat approach Wojtek Pilorz has suggested sounds interesting, though I
think changing EXTRAVERSION is more straight-forward, if more intrusive.
> I enter these names directly into lilo.conf image= with a simple
> label= to boot them. It's a simple system, but it works and lets me
I wouldn't rely on any system that needs lilo for identification
purposes such as this. I use Grub, which can arbitrarily load kernels from
the disk (much like loadlin, just that it runs as a boot-loader), hence I
wouldn't have whatever string you pass to lilo.
Personally, being off-topic, I think that a Grub like system (or Grub
itself) should be the default boot-loader in RedHat, due to the fact it is
far less touchy about using it the wrong way (more accurately - after initial
installation, one doesn't need to touch the boot record).
I think too many Linux related problems are actually lilo related, when
people try to do things they don't properly understand. Not to mention that
Grub is far nicer on recovery issues (you can boot arbitrary kernels, even
from a floppy. I like that).
But this wasn't the issue.
Nimrod
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/