mx23 ahs release: auto update kernels

[fehlix]

... and it'll be a (too) long interval, as AHS is meant for latest hardware, especially for those waiting for the most recent kernels (most of the times as the remedy) as soon as possible ...

The question here is about auto update of the kernel during apt full/dist-upgrade operation- not whether or when those are or will be available within mx ahs-repos.

[Charlie Brown]

... and it'll be a (too) long interval, as AHS is meant for latest hardware, especially for those waiting for the most recent kernels (most of the times as the remedy) as soon as possible ...

The question here is about auto update of the kernel during apt full/dist-upgrade operation- not whether or when those are or will be available within mx ahs-repos.

I know what the question is and I'm able to understand what I read. My reply was to this:

I would prefer auto-update with the mainstream LTS kernel. I believe that suits the majority of users with less fuss.

In addition to this:

we already have that on the main releases. that is not what is being discussed here.

[uncle mark]

We have bee playing with the notion of doing automatic kernel updates on the ahs releases. We would use the liquorix kernels for this.

This poll will run for one week. I and the development team reserve the right to make the final decision.

As a KDE user, and assuming this would apply to the KDE version which uses AHS by default, I would be opposed.

@Adrian

[Snod Blatter]

The idea of having to run .1 releases doesn't fill me with glee.. I try to wait until at least .5 before upgrading so any big issues have long since been ironed out. But then I could always just lock the packages where they are.

How do you plan to deal with the constant threat of the proprietary nvidia drivers refusing to build with new kernels?

[dolphin_oracle]

The idea of having to run .1 releases doesn't fill me with glee.. I try to wait until at least .5 before upgrading so any big issues have long since been ironed out. But then I could always just lock the packages where they are.

How do you plan to deal with the constant threat of the proprietary nvidia drivers refusing to build with new kernels?

we already vet them before we release into the ahs repo.

[fehlix]

to add: During auto update of the liquorix kernel, the current running kernel will not be removed,
So user would have a "fallback" within the GRUB menu to select and boot into the one which worked before the update. So at least one older liquorix kernel would be available to boot into. What might happen even if autoremoval of normal packages have not been enabled, that during kernel update older kernels get autoremoved by apt's full-upgrade operations.

[MXRobo]

Likely already considered, but could .1 releases cause a problem if one doesn’t update for months?

[Stevo]

Just: The dot releases are very frequent on Liquorix, therefore it may also be tiresome for users , every 3-4 days ... It may be better just from i.e. 6.6.x to 6.7 ... 6.8...

Since the Liquorix kernels are being rebuilt from source for our own MX AHS repositories, we do have the ability to skip some of their dot releases to keep the update frequency to a lower level. As the rebuilder, I've been doing that unless a release fixes a bug.

The metapackages can also be uninstalled to disable any auto-updates; perhaps this feature could be added to MX Tweak so that could be done with a couple mouse clicks. This means the last kernel and headers would remain installed, but that's it for the updates.

[artytux]

Having a choice at install time and also later opt in would be good,
i used two rolling distros over many many years and after many kernel updates (not all) having to fix associated problems (so many differences with users hardware)
Now very happy with OTB kernel on my workstation, rock solid !

Maybe a third vote option *OTB kernel good*

[rambo919]

Keep in mind that due to semantic problems people still get confused as to what "auto update" in this case actually means....