wish to migrate from 2.6.5 to 2.6.13

[Cadillac84]

I am always so concerned about trying to patch or update! :confused:

I apologize in advance for asking this; I know it has been asked before but I have a hole in my understanding of it -- through which all my work to this point could fall. :eek:

uname -a reports as follows:

Linux rapidw 2.6.5-7.97-default #1 Fri Jul 2 14:21:59 UTC 2004 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux

The current stable release is 2.6.15.3.

So, I could patch my way up by patching with

patch-2.6.6.bz2, then
patch-2.6.7.bz2, then
patch-2.6.8.bz2, then
patch-2.6.9.bz2, then
patch-2.6.10.bz2, then
patch-2.6.11.bz2, then
patch-2.6.12.bz2, then
patch-2.6.13.bz2, then
patch-2.6.14.bz2, then
and, finally, patch-2.6.15.bz2

Is that right? Would I have to do each of them? And, I suppose I would want to reboot after each patch to make sure what I had done was working.

So, that's a lot of patching.

Before you tell me I shouldn't do that, just tell me if that is correct -- one by one and only one step at a time?

OK, now you can tell me I shouldn't do that. I'll want instead to get

linux-2.6.13.3.tar.bz2 and carefully untar that and compile it.

Makes me nervous, but is that really the best way?

I assume it doesn not matter that my installation is SuSE or if it weren't, right? I get the linux-2.6.13.3.tar.bz2 from http://www.us.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/ and just be careful, huh?

Again, I'm sorry to be asking a question that's been asked a million times, but somehow after reading the Qs and As of others, the Qs weren't exactly what I wanted to ask.

Thanks in advance.

Chuck

[je_fro]

You _could_ apply all the incremental patches, but it's better to download the tarball and do it that way...
However, SuSE probably relies on a patched kernel of their own...I know redhat did. You run the risk of your system freaking out on a stock kernel because it's expecting a SuSE kernel. But I don't know for sure...any SuSE users in the house?

[bwkaz]

Linux rapidw 2.6.5-7.97-default #1 Fri Jul 2 14:21:59 UTC 2004 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux

The current stable release is 2.6.15.3.

So, I could patch my way up by patching with

patch-2.6.6.bz2, then
patch-2.6.7.bz2, then
patch-2.6.8.bz2, then
patch-2.6.9.bz2, then
patch-2.6.10.bz2, then
patch-2.6.11.bz2, then
patch-2.6.12.bz2, then
patch-2.6.13.bz2, then
patch-2.6.14.bz2, then
and, finally, patch-2.6.15.bz2 Absolutely not. (For one, you'd still have to apply the patch-2.6.15.4.bz2 file (2.6.15.4 was released today). But that's not the biggest problem. The biggest problem is below:)

Your kernel is not 2.6.5. It's 2.6.5-7.97-default, which means it's been patched by someone else already. (SuSE, in your case.) The patch-2.6.6.bz2 file will only work cleanly with a 2.6.5 kernel source tree from kernel.org.

Is that right? Would I have to do each of them? Yes, you would have to do each of them in turn (they each build on the previous one), IF you were running 2.6.5 from kernel.org. But you aren't, so it won't work.

And, I suppose I would want to reboot after each patch to make sure what I had done was working. Um... that would not help, no. Those patches are for the kernel source, not the kernel binary. (This isn't Windows, we don't patch binaries. Source is portable, binaries aren't; we patch the source to make sure only one patch is needed to cover all CPUs. ;)) You have to apply the patches to a kernel source tree, and rebooting is not necessary if you're just patching a source tree. Rebooting is only necessary after configuring, building, and installing the new kernel, and you only do that once (after applying all the patches).

OK, now you can tell me I shouldn't do that. I'll want instead to get

linux-2.6.13.3.tar.bz2 and carefully untar that and compile it. linux-2.6.15.3, (.4) you mean? Yes, you will have to do that. Or, just look for a kernel update from SuSE -- they probably have a much newer kernel package that you could use. And it'll probably work better with the rest of your distro, since SuSE has already configured it properly, and it'll have any extra patches that SuSE's user-space tools require. (I think this last bit is what je_fro was referring to in his comment.)

[Cadillac84]

Thank you both for the replies. I think I've got my mind wrapped around the process now. I won't do any of the above, but instead will try my luck with Novell. I found an error on their website last night and posted a feedback (politely -- I may not be smart, but I am polite! :-) ) The webmaster asked that I furnish some urls about the contradictory info which I sent along with screen shots and then told him I thought he should give me a one-year single-server license for SuSE LES9 as a reward. (I'm sure that'll happen! LOL)

Funny, last night when I was writing, the latest stable release shown at http://www.kernel.org/ was 2.6.15.3 and I see it is now .4

Anyway, just to finish out the train of thought, may I ask a followup?

Assume for the moment that I did have a clean 2.6.5 from kernel.org and I patched and patched and patched. I understand what you said about patching source, not binaries, but at some point all that source has to become part of the binary, does it not?

So after all the patches had been applied, what is the final step that "incorporates" the patched source into the running kernel?

BTW, I am damned glad I decided to ask and then wait for an explanation. I would have made an unholy mess if I had started patching. And, I agree it will be better to stick with what I can get from SuSE on this one.

[je_fro]

You're not going to "incorporate the patched source into the running kernel". You'll compile the patched kernel and copy it to where grub can find it, and then reboot to the new kernel.

[Cadillac84]

After all, bwkaz said:
Rebooting is only necessary after configuring, building, and installing the new kernel, and you only do that once (after applying all the patches). (emphasis added)
So, I immediately come back and ask about incorporating the patches.

As Poirot says to Capt. Hastings, "You see but you do not observe! You must use the little grey cells, mon ami."

Thanks, je_fro! :cool:

Thanks, bwkaz! :o

[bwkaz]

No big deal. If je_fro hadn't explained it, I just would've tried again. ;)

Funny, last night when I was writing, the latest stable release shown at http://www.kernel.org/ was 2.6.15.3 and I see it is now .4 Yep, it was released only yesterday. (I've got an RSS feed from kernel.org in my FF bookmarks that I check once in a while to see whether they've released any updates. I happened to check it yesterday while writing my reply, and saw that .4 was showing up. I had already put .3 in my reply before I checked the feed, so I went back and edited in .4 instead.)

[Cadillac84]

I registered w/Novell for a free trial period and was thus able to obtain SP3 in the form of three CD iso files. Used Nero to burn the images to CD, but I have not been able to get the system to read them.

But, because I was registered at Novell, I was able to use the online update. So now I am at:

Linux rapidw 2.6.5-7.244-default #1 Mon Dec 12 18:32:25 UTC 2005 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux

the date of which is the date of the SP3 release (Dec 12, 2005). I had been at 2.6.5-7.97; so I have made progress.

I am going to suppose that Novell has patched 2.6.5 to the "-7.244" which they think is equivalent to the ".15.3" or ".15.4"

Anyway, I'm going to be like the lettuce and quit while I'm a head.

Everything is working the way I want it and with my level of knowledge it is likely the more I do the worse it will get. :-)

Thanks again for your explanations and help.