Kernel 2.6.x "assumes" old config
Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2005 5:29 pm
[PROBLEM]
I had a problem with a kernel I´ve compiled, so I wanted to make a new one - starting completely from scratch in order to avoid problems introduced in my last build. So I ran "make mrproper" on a freshly unzipped kernel source.
But what happened???
When I ran "make menuconfig", it had my old settings already applied automatically.
WTF???
Why is it doing this? And which config did it use? And there is NO note about this behavior in the README. *sigh*
[SOLUTION]
I found out that it looks for config* files within the /boot directory and I think it takes the one with the youngest date.
Remove or rename all config* files there and the new kernel should not find anything anymore.
[REMARKS]
What the hell has happened to the kernel developers? This behavior is windows-style: "I´m guessing, because you are an idiot-user...". I am soooo angry! I mean: I was able to workaround this stupid idea, but who came up with it anyway?
There IS a make parameter called "oldconfig" - and if I wanted to keep anything from my old config I could do it - I do not need idiot-supporting-and-making-things-worse mechanisms!
I had a problem with a kernel I´ve compiled, so I wanted to make a new one - starting completely from scratch in order to avoid problems introduced in my last build. So I ran "make mrproper" on a freshly unzipped kernel source.
But what happened???
When I ran "make menuconfig", it had my old settings already applied automatically.
WTF??? Why is it doing this? And which config did it use? And there is NO note about this behavior in the README. *sigh*
[SOLUTION]
I found out that it looks for config* files within the /boot directory and I think it takes the one with the youngest date.
Remove or rename all config* files there and the new kernel should not find anything anymore.
[REMARKS]
What the hell has happened to the kernel developers? This behavior is windows-style: "I´m guessing, because you are an idiot-user...". I am soooo angry! I mean: I was able to workaround this stupid idea, but who came up with it anyway?
There IS a make parameter called "oldconfig" - and if I wanted to keep anything from my old config I could do it - I do not need idiot-supporting-and-making-things-worse mechanisms!