Crash while upgrading kernel & stable releases

Vincent Untz vincent at
Tue Jun 21 01:33:23 CDT 2005

Le lundi 20 juin 2005 à 12:56 -0700, Matt Zimmerman a écrit :
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 11:12:49AM +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
> > I updated one of my Hoary computer yesterday and, unfortunately, it
> > crashed during the upgrade. What was really unfortunate, is that there was
> > a kernel upgrade. And what was even more unfortunate is that the kernel
> > version number was the same as the previous one. So it deleted the old
> > one...
> Can you explain the nature of the failure (what actually happened to your
> computer as a result)?  It isn't obvious that a crash during a kernel
> upgrade would cause a problem, and if it does, it can probably be fixed.

The computer was freezed. Absolutely no activity. I was forced to reboot
(after having waited 30 minutes).
I don't know how reproducable it is, and I'm not sure I want to try to
reproduce ;-) But it happened at least once to me.

When I rebooted, after grub launched linux, there was an error with
something like "bad file". I should have written it down, but I needed
to quickly fix the computer and so I forgot.

> > As you can guess, the result was that the computer was unbootable (and
> > still is ;-)). I know the upgrade contains only security fixes, but I
> > believe the version number should have been incremented, if only to
> > prevent problems like this one. Wouldn't it make sense to adopt this
> > policy?
> Installing every kernel in parallel isn't very workable; at over 50M per
> kernel this would occupy a huge amount of space, and all third-party modules
> added by the user/admin would need to be recompiled with every upgrade.

I understand that it can take a huge amount of disk space. Wouldn't it
be possible to only keep the last two versions of the kernel?


Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.

More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list