Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Sat, 6 Jun 2020 11:34:28 -0500, Dale wrote: > >>>> From what I've read, I like my way better. I did have to change the >>>> names from bzimage* to kernel* but other than that, I can use the >>>> naming method I've used for years and keep the good kernels I want. >>> make install names the kernels vmlinuz-$VERSION, and updates a >>> symlink to vmlinuz if one exists. >> But sometimes I have more than one of the same version. I add a -1, -2, >> -3 etc to them as I go. From my understanding, make install doesn't do >> that. I do and with good reason. It seems make install won't accomplish >> what I do by hand. > There's a kernel option that does that automatically, LOCALVERSION I > think, but it's years since I've needed to touch it.
But if it changes how it works and I don't know it, that could cause problems. It could even remove something I don't want removed. If I do it myself, I know what is done and don't remove anything I don't want to lose. Even the make commands change between kernels at times. I suspect make install has changes too. I don't want to have to track kernel changes just to know if I can use make install and still get what I have now. > >>>> My biggest problem, getting the dracut command options right. If I >>>> didn't need dracut, I'd be in heaven. >>> If you have a plain setup, dracut shouldn't need any options. >> I don't have a plain setup tho nor do I really want that setup. > You don't boot from an encrypted drive (yet) or use unusual hardware, > that's what I meant by a plain system. Dracut handles booting from a a > btrfs root on a LUKS encrypted block device here with no fancy > configuration. It really is impressive the way it figures so much out for > itself. > What I meant was, I don't use make install because I do things differently than make install does. It's not "plain" in that regard. >> I like >> having backup kernels and my own numbering system. It has worked for me >> for decades, ever since I started using Gentoo and building my own >> kernels. I don't see any point in changing what works unless I can >> streamline what I'm already getting with the results I expect. If I >> could get rid of the init thingy, I would have zero issues with my >> method. It's dracut that causes the issues. We all know how much I >> dislike init thingys tho. ;-) That said, dracut hasn't failed me in a >> while. If it can't build correctly, it does spit out it failed. It's >> been a while since the init thingy it creates has failed as well. So, >> at least there is that. > I use a shell script to compile and install the kernel, build the > initramfs and then update the bootloader. It means the process is always > executed consistently and I only have to remember one command :) > > Well, we know my scripting ability isn't anywhere near that advanced. Claiming I can do a basic script is a stretch. ROFL When I do it manually, I get consistent results to and I know what steps were taken to get there. My only problem is recalling the options for dracut. Dale :-) :-)
