On 07/07/11 17:25, kanenas@hawaii.rr.com wrote:

On Wednesday 06 July 2011 07:37:44 pm Per Jessen wrote:

...

kanenas@hawaii.rr.com wrote:

...

It seems that there are a few stallwarts out there, yours truly one of us, who still use suse 11.3, 11.2, 11.1 and even 10.x as the main os. Most of these os's are out of maintenance, so a kernel upgrade would have to be manual. If you have upgraded the kernel in an out of maintenance system, can you please post a comment or two on the result? Nothing much to say except it's no big deal. Get the kernel source you want, configure it using the existing config.gz as a base, then build and install. Recreate initrd.

-- Per Jessen, Zürich (18.8°C) Thanks Per, actually the question is more about the after effects of a kernel upgrade rather than the mechanics of it.

Which of course is one of the biggest pains in the ass when one tries to answer a question from people: they think that the reader of their question is a psychic and/or a mind reader and knows exactly what the person is talking about when asking for help. Against my better judgement, yesterday I got involved in trying to help a person with a problem. Getting information to be able to help this person is like pulling teeth :-( . As she is a 'friend' of my wife's so now I have to be diplomatic about how I tell her to "pull her finger out" and provide the info I need :-( . Why didn't you simply state the above to begin with? That you want to know the "after effects" and not "the mechanics" of doing a kernel upgrade? You just wasted Per's time in responding to you, and mine in for pointing this out to you.

the two basic reasons for an upgrade are of course security and functionality. sooo, has it worked? Have the people stayed with an updated kernel? what problems were encountered? any regressions ? any great improvements? fyi, the os this posting is coming thru is 11.1 and uname gives me the last official kernel for it: 2.6.27.56-0.1-default ! i have played with upgrades in test partirions, also played with 11.3 and 11.4 in tests, now i am considering an upgrade of the basic os. And I was thinking that perhaps a kernel upgrade might provide almost all the benefits of a later os, without all the hassles. or is that wrong? d.

BC -- God must love crazy people. He keeps making so many of them. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Basil Chupin said the following on 07/07/2011 03:51 AM:

Against my better judgement, yesterday I got involved in trying to help a person with a problem. Getting information to be able to help this person is like pulling teeth :-( . As she is a 'friend' of my wife's so now I have to be diplomatic about how I tell her to "pull her finger out" and provide the info I need :-( .

BTDT just recently. We don't get paid tor this kind of nonsense, do we? -- If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities. -- Voltaire -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

kanenas@hawaii.rr.com wrote:

On Wednesday 06 July 2011 07:37:44 pm Per Jessen wrote:

...

kanenas@hawaii.rr.com wrote:

...

It seems that there are a few stallwarts out there, yours truly one of us, who still use suse 11.3, 11.2, 11.1 and even 10.x as the main os. Most of these os's are out of maintenance, so a kernel upgrade would have to be manual. If you have upgraded the kernel in an out of maintenance system, can you please post a comment or two on the result?

Nothing much to say except it's no big deal. Get the kernel source you want, configure it using the existing config.gz as a base, then build and install. Recreate initrd.

-- Per Jessen, Zürich (18.8°C)

Thanks Per, actually the question is more about the after effects of a kernel upgrade rather than the mechanics of it. the two basic reasons for an upgrade are of course security and functionality. sooo, has it worked?

Yes, there's really no reason why it shouldn't.

Have the people stayed with an updated kernel? what problems were encountered? any regressions ? any great improvements?

The only reasons I've had to upgrade has been functionality - hardware or network (lvs, iptables) in my case. AFAIR, the openSUSE kernel comes with a number of patches, which might not apply cleanly to newer kernels (for instance because they've been applied upstream), but you get to choose if you need them or not :-)

fyi, the os this posting is coming thru is 11.1 and uname gives me the last official kernel for it: 2.6.27.56-0.1-default ! i have played with upgrades in test partirions, also played with 11.3 and 11.4 in tests, now i am considering an upgrade of the basic os. And I was thinking that perhaps a kernel upgrade might provide almost all the benefits of a later os, without all the hassles. or is that wrong?

I think that is wrong, yes. When you compare two versions of openSUSE, the significant differences are found in the applications, not in the kernel. (sometimes in the kernel too of course). I'm posting this from my 10.3 workstation running 2.6.22.5-31-default. It's long overdue for an upgrade, but I'm hanging on to my old working konqueror. :-) -- Per Jessen, Zürich (19.8°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Wednesday 06 July 2011 09:58:30 pm Per Jessen wrote:

kanenas@hawaii.rr.com wrote:

...

On Wednesday 06 July 2011 07:37:44 pm Per Jessen wrote:

...

kanenas@hawaii.rr.com wrote:

...

It seems that there are a few stallwarts out there, yours truly one of us, who still use suse 11.3, 11.2, 11.1 and even 10.x as the main os. Most of these os's are out of maintenance, so a kernel upgrade would have to be manual. If you have upgraded the kernel in an out of maintenance system, can you please post a comment or two on the result?

Nothing much to say except it's no big deal. Get the kernel source you want, configure it using the existing config.gz as a base, then build and install. Recreate initrd.

-- Per Jessen, Zürich (18.8°C)

Thanks Per, actually the question is more about the after effects of a kernel upgrade rather than the mechanics of it. the two basic reasons for an upgrade are of course security and functionality. sooo, has it worked?

Yes, there's really no reason why it shouldn't.

...

Have the people stayed with an updated kernel? what problems were encountered? any regressions ? any great improvements?

The only reasons I've had to upgrade has been functionality - hardware or network (lvs, iptables) in my case.

AFAIR, the openSUSE kernel comes with a number of patches, which might not apply cleanly to newer kernels (for instance because they've been applied upstream), but you get to choose if you need them or not :-)

...

fyi, the os this posting is coming thru is 11.1 and uname gives me the last official kernel for it: 2.6.27.56-0.1-default ! i have played with upgrades in test partirions, also played with 11.3 and 11.4 in tests, now i am considering an upgrade of the basic os. And I was thinking that perhaps a kernel upgrade might provide almost all the benefits of a later os, without all the hassles. or is that wrong?

I think that is wrong, yes. When you compare two versions of openSUSE, the significant differences are found in the applications, not in the kernel. (sometimes in the kernel too of course).

I'm posting this from my 10.3 workstation running 2.6.22.5-31-default. It's long overdue for an upgrade, but I'm hanging on to my old working konqueror. :-)

-- Per Jessen, Zürich (19.8°C)

Thank you Peter, these are excellent comments. AND your suggestion for the build service, I have never tried that, will definitely look into it. But the biggest help was the revelation that you are still using an even earlier version. whatever i decide, will surely be tested extensively in the test partition. thanks again :) d. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Per Jessen said the following on 07/07/2011 03:58 AM:

I think that is wrong, yes. When you compare two versions of openSUSE, the significant differences are found in the applications, not in the kernel. (sometimes in the kernel too of course).

Possibly. If this were me, I'd look at two things. First, I'd look at the history of the kernel. There have been many bug fixes, some to do with security, some to do with errors. There have also been enhancements to many things such as the file systems and the scheduler. They may or may not apply to you. Try http://*.kernel.org for various values of '*'. Go google. Try such as http://www.h-online.com/open/features/Kernel-Log-Coming-in-2-6-39-Part-1-Net... and previous "log" articles. Second I'd look at what applications I use. Not just the top surface ones like your mailer and browser, but what goes to support then such as your desktop manager and all the bits that run under it like xorg and compositing and drivers. What fixes are there. Build a dependency tree. I regularly use mindmap tools so the tree-building is easy for me :-) Per would add a note about adding the negative, the things that have been taken away, such as the functions in Konqueror. What you end up with is the FACTS that feed your decision. FACTS. But you have to put at least as much effort in as you expect benefit out. Of course I'm lazy: I just upgrade and apply patches and fixes :-) -- For every person who wants to teach there are approximately thirty people who don't want to learn--much. W. C. Sellar and R. J. Yeatman, And Now All This (1932) introduction -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Thursday 07 July 2011 04:02:51 am Greg Freemyer wrote:

On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 8:05 PM, wrote:

...

It seems that there are a few stallwarts out there, yours truly one of us, who still use suse 11.3, 11.2, 11.1 and even 10.x  as the main os. Most of these os's are out of maintenance, so  a kernel upgrade would have to be manual. If you have upgraded the kernel in an out of maintenance system, can you please post a comment or two on the result? thanks, d.

Are you familiar with the Evergreen project?

http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Evergreen

Yes, the evergreen repo and gwdg repos have been added in yast.

Lot's of non-kernel updates have been released as part of the Evergreen project.

For 11.1 see: http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Evergreen_11.1

Both 11.1 and 11.2 are being supported with new security patches provided by your friendly community volunteers.

11.1 in particular seems your interest per later emails.

The 2.6.27 kernel for 11.1 has received no patches from the Evergreen team.

But a 2.6.32 test kernel for 11.1 is available. I suspect it is missing a lot of add-in module support etc., but no users have complained to date about missing functionality.

did not see it on evergeen

It's OBS at https://build.opensuse.org/project/show?project=openSUSE%3AEvergreen%3A11.1 %3Akernel-2.6.32%3ATest

ok, that's a little diff, will test it:)

Give it a spin some time. And join the Evergreen users mailing list. It is pretty low volume, so you don't have to worry about getting tons of emails.

Greg

thanks Greg:)

-- Greg Freemyer Head of EDD Tape Extraction and Processing team Litigation Triage Solutions Specialist http://www.linkedin.com/in/gregfreemyer CNN/TruTV Aired Forensic Imaging Demo -    http://insession.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/23/how-computer-evidence-gets-retrie ved/

The Norcross Group The Intersection of Evidence & Technology http://www.norcrossgroup.com

-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org