Fedora Core 3 Update: mkinitrd-4.1.18.1-1
Dave Jones
davej at redhat.com
Fri Jul 29 20:39:40 UTC 2005
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 03:31:33PM -0500, Damian Menscher wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2005, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> >This update should fix the issue a number of people saw
> >after the recent kernel update where various modules would
> >fail to load during boot, making systems unbootable.
> >
> >After updating this package, remove, and reinstall the
> >recent kernel update, and the initrd will be recreated
> >correctly.
>
> For those of us who recognized the dangers of the new kernel and never
> installed it, what is the recommended course of action? Will a simple
> "up2date" that installs the new mkinitrd and the new kernel
> simultaneously work? I'm guessing I should up2date the mkinitrd in one
> pass, then up2date the kernel in a second pass? Some confirmation would
> be nice.
To play it really safe, do them as two operations.
up2date mkinitrd first, and then up2date -fu kernel
> I would like to know exactly what bug was fixed here, and am assuming
> that 145660 is a bugzilla number. But I'm "not authorized to access"
> that bug:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=145660
The bug for this issue should have been 163407, that's a screwup in the
mkinitrd changelog entry.
> Since when are bug reports so secretive? I can understand making them
> restricted in the case of embargoed security fixes, but that does not
> apply here (or in the several other cases I've seen of unreadable
> bugzilla entries.
The 'sekrit' bug is a RHEL4 bug. There can be many reasons for them
being non-visible other than security embargoes. Confidential information
from partners, NDA'd info, bug reports from preproduction hardware etc etc.
> Rather than forming a fedora-bugs triage team, how about just letting
> people see what bugs already exist, so we can avoid future dupes?
This wasn't intentional, just a good old fashioned screwup.
Dave
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list