Kernel Security update

[Brian Densmore]

I'm sorry you lost me here.

 You need to do make modules (if you use modules)
 then  make modules_install (see above)
 then make install.

If you don't do these things, in this order, the new kernel won't work
right. Unless of course all the modules are already installed, in which
case make install is all you need. I personally wouldn't risk it, but
hey whatever floats your boat.

Brian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeremy Fowler [mailto:jfowler at westrope.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 2:43 PM
> To: Richard Edelman; kclug at kclug.org
> Subject: RE: Kernel Security update
> 
> 
> Well it appears "make install" does everything "make" does 
> and then runs
> /sbin/installkernel afterwards. So I guess doing a "make" and 
> a "make install"
> are somewhat redundant.
> 
> make modules_install copies the modules to 
> /lib/modules/<kernel-version>/
> 
> Standard practice is to copy the new kernel image over to the 
> /boot partition
> and then  build the kernel modules and install them. However, 
> I'm sure you could
> do it however you like, I doubt it makes any difference.
> 
> -Jeremy
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Richard Edelman [mailto:edelman at speedscript.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 12:59 PM
> > To: kclug at kclug.org
> > Subject: Re: Kernel Security update
> >
> >
> > Well, technically shouldn't 'make install' be done after 'make
> > modules_install'? I dunno, probably doesn't matter, but to 
> me makes the most
> > sense. RPM upgrades of the kernel are fine for the layman, and most
> > workstations. You're not truly a linux geek until you 
> compile your own kernel
> > all the time, but I do realize some people just want to use 
> the damn computer
> > and not have to worry about knowing all the intricate details.
> >
> > My ex-gf was one of those people until I showed her how 
> easy it was to
> > compile the kernel and we measured the perfomance increase 
> over a stock
> > kernel. From then on she would compile her own kernel. Now 
> that's sexy. Too
> > bad that relationship didn't work out, heh.
> >
> > Rich
> >
> > On Wednesday 14 November 2001 12:32 pm, Jeremy Fowler wrote:
> > > What! What could be easier than:
> > >
> > > # make config           (.... Or xconfig, personal pref)
> > > # make dep
> > > # make clean
> > > # nohup make bzImage &
> > > # tail -f nohup.out     (.... to monitor the progress)
> > > # make install          (.... yep, this works!)
> > > # make modules
> > > # make modules_install
> > > # emacs /etc/lilo.conf
> > > # lilo -v
> > >
> > > ??? ;-)
> > >
> > > Well rpm upgrades are A LOT easier, but Redhat doesn't 
> recommend an rpm
> > > -Uvh. Check out their how-to here:
> > >
> > > 
> http://www.redhat.com/support/resources/howto/kernel-upgrade/k
> ernel-upgrade
> > >.html
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Brian Densmore [mailto:DensmoreB at ctbsonline.com]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 10:55 AM
> > > > To: Richard Edelman; kclug at kclug.org
> > > > Subject: RE: Kernel Security update
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yes, that's the one. It was kernel 2.2.19. I didn't 
> notice the through
> > > > kernel 2.4.10 part though. Hmm, I use 2.4.3, better 
> check on that and
> > > > upgrade if necessary. They have an RPM for the kernel 
> upgrade! I've
> > > > never seen that before!? Is it possible to upgrade the 
> kernel without
> > > > recompiling now?
> > > > If so, all I can say is ... Whoo-hoo!
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Richard Edelman [mailto:edelman at speedscript.com]
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 10:17 AM
> > > > > To: kclug at kclug.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: RHat 7.1 kernel version
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Don't use the 2.4.11 kernel, it's rather fubar.  Is that
> > > > > mandrake security
> > > > > hole notice the one about a local DoS exploit affecting all
> > > > > kernels 2.2.16
> > > > > (might have been 2.2.19?) to 2.4.10? 2.4.12 is probably the
> > > > > safest to use,
> > > > > but the VM has been fully hammered out (supposedly) in
> > > > > 2.4.14. At least, now
> > > > > it's to the point where Linus is really comfortable with it,
> > > > > and even Alan
> > > > > Cox is going to use the new VM in his tree.
> > > > >
> > > > > Rich
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wednesday 14 November 2001 09:51 am, Brian Densmore wrote:
> > > > > > Speaking of kernels. Has any one seen the Mandrake notice
> > > > >
> > > > > of a security
> > > > >
> > > > > > hole on the 2.4.11 kernel!? Has any else noticed there
> > > > >
> > > > > seems to be an
> > > > >
> > > > > > increase in security announces on Linux apps?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Not to sound paranoid, but is it possible that the Dark
> > > > >
> > > > > Lord is back in
> > > > >
> > > > > > His Dark Tower and is seeking to destroy the Free 
> World again?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Brian
> > > > >
> > > > > majordomo at kclug.org
> > > > > Enter without the quotes in body of message 
> > > >
> majordomo at kclug.org
> > >
> majordomo at kclug.org
> >
> >
> majordomo at kclug.org
> 
> 
> 
> majordomo at kclug.org
>