Web lists-archives.com

Re: Kernel problem?




David Wright composed on 2018-01-11 12:52 (UTC-0600):

> 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.

Who didn't get what?

>> I think you missed this same thread post from yesterday:
>> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2018/01/msg00372.html

> 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.

I expected it to. Here's the same listing with nonessential lines excised:

-rw-r--r--  1 17388979 Jan  9 17:45 initrd.img-4.9.0-4-686-pae
-rw-r--r--  1 17392772 Jan  9 17:44 initrd.img-4.9.0-5-686-pae
-rw-r--r--  1  3643920 Dec 22 19:39 vmlinuz-4.9.0-4-686-pae
-rw-r--r--  1  3645296 Jan  4 06:12 vmlinuz-4.9.0-5-686-pae

Clearly, 4.9.0-4 and 4.9.0-5 pae kernels are present, the very kernels in the OP
that, as I read, deloptes subsequently claimed were "one and the same package"
(could not coexist).
-- 
"Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Whatever else you
get, get wisdom." Proverbs 4:7 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/