Re: Kernel problem?
On Wed 10 Jan 2018 at 19:48:57 (-0500), Felix Miata wrote:
> deloptes composed on 2018-01-11 01:12 (UTC+0100):
> > David Wright wrote:
> >>> It seemed to install vmlinuz-4.9.0-5-686-pae (and associated config and
> >>> image files, etc) in place of 4.9.0-4-686-pae versions. Now the system
> >> [spaces inserted] ↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑ really? It's a different package so
> >> it should install alongside the old one.
> > no, this is one and the same package - just a different debian revision - so
> > the previous gets replaced AFAIK
Sorry, but evidently you don't.
> I think you missed this same thread post from yesterday:
I'm not sure that would help. The first half of that post showed
a very idiosyncratic /boot listing which seems to be customised
to support your own multibooting setup. I'm not sure whether it
would help or confuse the OP.
The second half didn't take any account of what the various parts
of the version numbers mean. They're not just there as a joke,
or an accident of punctuation.
The kernel-image maintainers update the Debian versions, and
*their* numbers, as quickly as possible. OTOH they strive to
change the ABI number as *slowly* as possible. Your advice was
wrong: you don't want to wait for an ABI change.
You should only revert to the old ABI version to get the system up
so that you can investigate why the new one won't work.¹
You should leave the new ABI version installed so that any
normal upgrades of it will take place. (It's always possible
that the reason the system didn't boot is because another bug
was present, and gets fixed in the usual manner.)
No one knows when the next ABI change will take place. It could
be tomorrow; it could be years away.
¹ There may be folks, too, who have yet to make kernel module
changes to suit the new ABI.
Disclaimer: sorry if you get hacked.