On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 12:37:27 +0100, Bernard wrote: > Camaleón wrote: >> On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 23:33:02 +0100, Bernard wrote: >>> If I were to upgrade kernels, which kernel would you recommend ? >>> >>> >> I would try with the backports one, as it's easier to install. If that >> also fails, I would compile the latest stable kernel from sources >> available at kernel's site (now 3.2.9). >> >> >> > The only one that I could find on my Squeeze backports is > 3.2.0-0.bpo.1-686-pae > > #apt-get install -s linux-image-3.2.0-0.bpo.1-686-pae (...) > some packages cannot be installed. This may mean that you have requested > something impossible... etc... > The following information could help you : > > The following packages have non satisfied dependances: > linux-image-3.2.0-0.bpo.1-686-pae : depends : linux-base (>=3~) but > 2.6.32-41 will have to be installed > Recommends : firmware-linux-free (>=3~) but 2.6.32.41 will have to > be installed > E: Defectuous packages
I wonder if you have properly configured your "sources.list" and priorities to handle backports. Instructions can be found here: http://backports-master.debian.org/Instructions/ Also, better use synaptic, it's easier to see what's needed and what's missing. Anyway, if you are unsure about how "backports" work, I would try first to play with it inside a testing system, such a virtual machine, to avoid breaking things within your current system. > Kernel 2.6.32-41, which I supposedly should install... is the one that > is already running on that system !! Sure, maybe due to your repository priorities. > I guess that I will have to do a new kernel compiling from sources and > headers and installation from scratch. That's another option. > But is it safe to try installing a 3.2 vintage on my system ? What's a "vintage" system? You mean your hardware is old? > Will it take up a lot more RAM ? Compiling? Yes, and also cpu. Compiling is an intesinve task and can take up to hours to complete, depending on your kernel config options and your hardware :-) > The only other 2.6 kernel that I could find is 2.6.33-20 (also to be > installed from scratch). Do you think that it might be safer to test > that one first ? I'd go for the 3.x branch. > Is this kernel likely to have taken into account the bug that concerns > my PCI wireless card ? Can't confirm on this, this is "test & try". Well, you can also try with a LiveCD of any distribution that has an updated kernel, you can load the LiveCD and test your wifi from there, leaving your current installation untouched. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jjl3an$28k$6...@dough.gmane.org
