Hello Pedro!try apt-cache search kernel-image* ;)
On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 05:32:44PM +0000, Pedro M. wrote:
Florian Ernst escribió:
On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 12:04:34PM +0000, Pedro M. wrote:A looooooooooooottttttttttt of packages. I suggest offer one simple, easy to remember and to type way.
I suggest create the module kernel-image.last
To upgrade the kernel to the last version.
In apt-get install -kernel last
|$ apt-cache show kernel-image-2.4-386 |[...] |Description: Linux kernel image for version 2.4 on 386. | This package will always depend on the latest 2.4 kernel image available | for 386.
...and similar other packages.
|[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ apt-cache search kernel-image-2.4- | wc -l |7
Not that much, at least in my eyes. YMMV.
Yes, but you cannot include a simple command in a tutorial or guide to do it....the apt-get would install the last kernel image for the default system architecture (i.e. I would detect if it's a i386X architecture and would download the last kernel module for this architecture ).
As the architecture of your box shouldn't change _that_ often some manual work / scripting might be acceptable, thereafter one could install one of the packages mentioned above.
Well, determine your 'architecture', meaning -386 / -586tsc / -686 /
-k6 / -k7 (possibly SMP) on IA32, you _should_ know better than any
script, install appropriate kernel-image, lean back.
We are talking about upgrading from an architecture to the same one, in a different kernel version.
And another thing : the user doesn't have to worry about this things and look for the porperly package (transparent installation).
If the user doesn't know this 'architecture', -386 (one size fits all) ought to be enough, (s)he probably won't _notice_ any speed differences at all.
Like said, in upgrading (not in installing in a virgin disk), the program would use the same architecture than the previous version installed.
I don't know this system. I am suggesting ->>>> kernel-image-lastversion-samearchitecture (by default; the user could change it, using options).It looks like you are suggesting kernel-image-dwimt (do what I mean to).
As I said, it should be possible / acceptable, but I see a huge
simplicity/danger-tradeoff.
The same danger than type it manually, with the advantage of use a easy to remember / reproduce command
If anybody wants to use it, can use it. If not, can do it manually.
Regards.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
