Albert Hopkins wrote: > On Tue, 2007-07-17 at 15:19 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: > >> On Tuesday 17 July 2007, Mick wrote: >> >>> On Tuesday 17 July 2007 13:20, Billy McCann wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Mick. From what I understand, using oldconfig for major >>>> version changes (.20 -> .21) is a bad idea. Here's what I did. It >>>> may be slow and stupid but it worked like a charm. >>>> >>> Sure, but I have been using oldconfig for previous major changes and >>> never had a problem like this before. >>> >> Now you know why the kernel devs keep telling you not to do it, heh :-) >> >> > > I don't know which kernel dev keeps saying that, but I'd recommend > he/she specify what is meant by "major version" since, historically: > > 2.6.22 > ^ ^ ^ > | | +--- Revision > | +----- Minor version > +------- Major version > > And therefore .20 -> .21 would not be considered a "major" version > change by most accounts. > > -- > Albert W. Hopkins > >
I have used oldconfig for years and have not had any problems with it either. I never went as far as going from a 2.4 kernel to a 2.6 kernel though. I'm pretty sure that wouldn't work. I see no reason why this shouldn't work since so many of us have done it before without a problem. Maybe you missed something simple? I know it's the simple things that get me a lot. Dale :-) :-) :-)
