Re: How to install a stable system with a backport kernel
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 01:20:16PM +1300, Alex King wrote:
> I need to install a stable system, but with a kernel from backports (or
> testing). I am using netboot.
>
> The system needs drivers from a more modern kernel than what's in stable to
> access its disks.
>
> Currently the only way I can see to install this system is to use another
> (non debian installer) method, such as fai or installing a testing system on
> a small partition and using that to debootstrap the system I want. For
> various reasons both are not ideal.
>
> Here are some ways I can think of to solve this problem:
>
> 1. Use an installer compiled with a backport kernel. This does not exist to
> my knowledge, but if anyone can point me to a netboot.tar.gz that does this
> I would be happy.
Download debian-installer package, and do some hack of it in build/
>
> 2. Use the testing installer, but pass --release stretch or --release
> stretch-backports to the installer. This does not work, the installer
> complains it can't find kernel modules. Even if booted with an appropriate
> monolithic kernel (I tried), this doesn't work.
In fact you can choose the expert mode, which will allow you to choose
which version to install.
In fact you can also have a preseed file to pass this argument.
>
> 3. Run the testing installer, but swap the release to stretch at the start
> of the install the base system stage. Any hints on how to do that? I see
> the following in choose-mirror.postinst:
>
> # If a -support udeb is available for the selected release, install it
> # This will mostly be used to preserve backwards compatibility with stable
> if db_get mirror/codename && [ "$RET" ]; then
> anna-install $RET-support || true
> fi
>
> But it seems using the net installer, there is no way to run with a
> --release that is not the same version as the installer. Perhaps we need a
> --installer-release and --target-release?
This hack should be work while may need even more background knowledge.
>
>
> All ideas welcome.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alex
>
Reply to: