Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 12:18:55 +0100 From: Dick Davies <rasputnik@hellooperator.net> To: Mark <admin@asarian-host.net> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is it safe to keep /kernel.old? Message-ID: <20040713111855.GB11963@lb.tenfour> In-Reply-To: <200407131018.I6DAIASL045534@asarian-host.net> References: <200407131018.I6DAIASL045534@asarian-host.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Mark <admin@asarian-host.net> [0719 11:19]: > Dear people, > > I have been applying patches over time; and when I recompile the kernel (4.9R p4), it keeps the old one around. My question is, though, is it safe to keep /kernel.old? I always keep it around, in case the new kernel has a problem. And that always seemed like a sensible policy to me. But what if one of the patches contains an exploitable bug? I run in securelevel 2, so I am not sure whether users could actually use the old kernel (once in multi-user mode). Still, I wonder if this concern is valid at all. Or whether I should perhaps get rid of the old kernel. What I generally do on all BSds is when I've been using the kernel happily for a week or two, I 'cp /kernel /kernel.ok' - if you let /kernel.old get *too* old, you might find it won't boot on a recent userland.... -- Don't go around saying the world owes you a living. The world owes you nothing. It was here first. -- Mark Twain Rasputin :: Jack of All Trades - Master of Nuns
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040713111855.GB11963>