Received: from smtp.ungleich.ch (mx.ungleich.ch [185.203.112.16]) by nld3-dev1.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 468DE782BC2 for <~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org>; Sat, 12 Dec 2020 11:16:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bridge.localdomain (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by smtp.ungleich.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id BACAF209A6; Sat, 12 Dec 2020 12:16:38 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ungleich.ch; s=mail; t=1607771798; bh=XInk7YA3Cc+W7tFMA594nRV/aT+KRHSzJe2QQnzXDhE=; h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-reply-to:Date:From; b=YHW9mVBtqqyFQy4pNpSaU1MZAmaG6IpGf6tXyOnP118/DLNmEP9/8O8/OlOsrF8ZN 9eO4yobyk07YF5LNuKqqYcgZkFufgGX5WYWBDct2EgsaQyQZtTJlgmRi2Tdw/n3tzV lNhZG8qMxgsGYA6Uhmr7Ch98EecU+/GhnvsUZwz6JKi//3DxRCaslbs9++Znr80w2P J/vcjTzyBmWEzRm6BouHCIvQH75LS5o6N+SQyeh8MIMeu9tZvtE2NvGeAb89tPtDVI ilN68isPVVmt1+VAKcBgWz0hso3IiD0DeZ/ELvRjuFPzIHVb4874bCJy/ZKVd70kZf 5TXHo4c0FdBYQ== Received: by bridge.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EC0B11A6EA51; Sat, 12 Dec 2020 12:16:47 +0100 (CET) References: <86c7a81e-1640-7f82-9e13-dfdbe1aad07b@gmail.com> <877dpnnxcu.fsf@ungleich.ch> <6ce1e9200bc916ef98e6132cd907d07660fcf174.camel@cogitri.dev> <2478872.my5MpkESCV@nanabozho> User-agent: mu4e 1.4.13; emacs 27.1 From: Nico Schottelius To: Ariadne Conill Cc: ~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org, Rasmus Thomsen Subject: Re: Implement versioned names for major libraries to ease upgrade process In-reply-to: <2478872.my5MpkESCV@nanabozho> Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2020 12:16:47 +0100 Message-ID: <874kkrnujk.fsf@ungleich.ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Ariadne Conill writes: >> > if we are already doing that, why do we not do it for the linux >> > kernel? >> >> Because maintaining multiple kernels is a lot of work because they're >> released relatively often and we have to rebuild all modules (e.g. zfs) >> against new kernel versions. > > I don't think they propose maintaining multiple kernels in parallel per se, > but instead versioning the package (with a provides linux-lts=${pkgver}) so > that older kernels can stick around if a newer kernel has a regression. Correct - it's not about maintaining them, but to `apk upgrade` without being forced to reboot, because some modules are missing after the upgrade. I'd imagine something on the lines of: a) "on kernel upgrade, do not remove linux-lts-$(uname -r)" However all other older versions can be replaced. This would already solve a major pain point. or b) Keep all previous kernel versions and let the user delete old versions manually I think this is +/- what Debian is doing. It results in a very long grub list and is annoying to cleanup, but it also give a lot of security, being able to switch back to an older version. I think (a) is cleaner, but probably more complicated to implement, as (b) could just mean that the package *name* differs and they all provide the linux-kernel. Cheers, Nico -- Modern, affordable, Swiss Virtual Machines. Visit www.datacenterlight.ch