I am currently using Linux Mint 19.1 Tessa and kernal 5.4.0.67, which
has been superseded, my question is, is there any advantage to upgrade
my kernal? I question the need for new kernals, which I understand that
the new kernals are attempting to address the needs of the new
hardwares,  so if I am not having problems is there any advatage to
upgrading the kernal?

On Wed, 22 Dec 2021 17:15:55 -0500, Nic <Nic@none.net> wrote:

>I am currently using Linux Mint 19.1 Tessa and kernal 5.4.0.67, which
>has been superseded, my question is, is there any advantage to upgrade
>my kernal? I question the need for new kernals, which I understand that
>the new kernals are attempting to address the needs of the new
>hardwares,  so if I am not having problems is there any advatage to
>upgrading the kernal?
>
I'm sure that you will get a multitude of answers to your question but
in all the years I have used Linux I have never seen an "improvement"
when I installed a new kernel. That is not to say that there might
have some improvement somewhere "way down deep down inside" but not
noticeable to humans (:-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

On 12/22/21 5:28 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Dec 2021 17:15:55 -0500, Nic <Nic@none.net> wrote:
>
>> I am currently using Linux Mint 19.1 Tessa and kernal 5.4.0.67, which
>> has been superseded, my question is, is there any advantage to upgrade
>> my kernal? I question the need for new kernals, which I understand that
>> the new kernals are attempting to address the needs of the new
>> hardwares,  so if I am not having problems is there any advatage to
>> upgrading the kernal?
>>
> I'm sure that you will get a multitude of answers to your question but
> in all the years I have used Linux I have never seen an "improvement"
> when I installed a new kernel. That is not to say that there might
> have some improvement somewhere "way down deep down inside" but not
> noticeable to humans (:-)

Thank You.

Nic wrote:
> if I am not having problems is there any advatage to upgrading the
> kernal?

kernel

Do you use your update manager as a method to view what updates are
available?

I don't remember exactly the evolution of that manager (is my manager
different from yours), except that it was commented about in the mint
blog. My point about the manager is the different icons for security,
kernel, and apps.

The 'problem' about what is or is not security related is that a
particular item w/ a particular icon can have only one icon; so a kernel
update cannot have a security icon because it has a kernel icon, but
kernel update very often are about a security issue.

Or said another way; someone might say that at the very least one should
accept security updates, but you don't really know (just from the icon,
without some separate research) if a kernel update has some kind of
important security aspect; it very well might, in which case you
*should* make the kernel update.

The mint update manager info has something to say about that. I'm
citing my 20.2 update manager 5.7.8.

> The different types of updates

> There are different types of updates:

> 'Software updates' are updates which fix bugs (or also sometimes
> which bring new features).

> 'Security updates' are updates which patch vulnerabilities.

> 'Kernel updates' represent the installation of a newer kernel.

> Security is very important but also very technical. Vulnerabilities
> don't always affect your computer and can be quite difficult to
> understand. Most people don't understand them at all and their
> personal computers are rarely at risk. That said, a security breach
> can have dire consequences, so it is always recommended to take them
> seriously.

> Software updates aren't as important. They bring bug fixes or
> improvements which are not related to security.

> In Linux Mint, kernel updates bring both security patches and bug
> fixes (and sometimes even new features), and they impact critical
> parts of the operating system. This makes kernel updates important
> from a security point of view, but also prone to regressions which
> can be hard to fix for novice users.

--
Mike Easter

Mike Easter cited:
> This makes kernel updates important from a security point of view,
> but also prone to regressions which can be hard to fix for novice
> users.

I would say that Mint's 'philosophy' about kernel updates would be that
users should avail themselves of Timeshift tech so that if something
goes wrong like a regression, they can timeshift back to the previous
system.

That strategy helps w/ the 'hard to fix' business.

--
Mike Easter

On 12/22/2021 02:15 PM, Nic wrote:
> I am currently using Linux Mint 19.1 Tessa and kernal 5.4.0.67, which
> has been superseded, my question is, is there any advantage to upgrade
> my kernal? I question the need for new kernals, which I understand that
> the new kernals are attempting to address the needs of the new
> hardwares,  so if I am not having problems is there any advatage to
> upgrading the kernal?
>
>

Keep your _kernel_ and system patched with security updates. Otherwise,
don't worry (too much) about new kernel versions.

Nic wrote:
> I am currently using Linux Mint 19.1 Tessa and kernal 5.4.0.67, which
> has been superseded, my question is, is there any advantage to upgrade
> my kernal? I question the need for new kernals, which I understand that
> the new kernals are attempting to address the needs of the new
> hardwares,  so if I am not having problems is there any advatage to
> upgrading the kernal?
>
>
How Long a Linux Kernel Release is Supported?

https://itsfoss.com/linux-kernel-release-support/

Le 22/12/2021 à 23:15, Nic a écrit :
> I am currently using Linux Mint 19.1 Tessa and kernal 5.4.0.67, which
> has been superseded, my question is, is there any advantage to upgrade
> my kernal? I question the need for new kernals, which I understand
> that the new kernals are attempting to address the needs of the new
> hardwares,  so if I am not having problems is there any advatage to
> upgrading the kernal?
>
>
hi,

When I installed a wifi6 card in my asus, I needed to update my kernel
to 5.10.

Now, i use 5.16 without any problem.

Emmanuel

On 12/22/21 5:15 PM, this is what Nic wrote:
> I am currently using Linux Mint 19.1 Tessa and kernal 5.4.0.67, which has been superseded, my question is, is there any advantage to upgrade
> my kernal? I question the need for new kernals, which I understand that the new kernals are attempting to address the needs of the new
> hardwares,  so if I am not having problems is there any advatage to upgrading the kernal?
>
>
I'm on linux Mint Cinnamon 20.2 and the kernel there is 5.4.0.91. Still the 5.4 kernel. Which is according to the list that Andrei Z.
posted, is good till 2025. So I don't see your concern.

--
Linux Mint Cinnamon 20.2 64bit, Dell Inspiron 5570 laptop
Quad Core i7-8550U, 16G Memory, 512G SSD, 750G & 1TB HDDs

On 12/23/21 10:27 AM, Big Al wrote:
> On 12/22/21 5:15 PM, this is what Nic wrote:
>> I am currently using Linux Mint 19.1 Tessa and kernal 5.4.0.67, which
>> has been superseded, my question is, is there any advantage to
>> upgrade my kernal? I question the need for new kernals, which I
>> understand that the new kernals are attempting to address the needs
>> of the new hardwares,  so if I am not having problems is there any
>> advatage to upgrading the kernal?
>>
>>
> I'm on linux Mint Cinnamon 20.2 and the kernel there is 5.4.0.91.
> Still the 5.4 kernel.  Which is according to the list that Andrei Z.
> posted, is good till 2025.  So I don't see your concern.
>
Was just wondering if it is important that I upgrade and run the risk of
wrecking a working system. So the the big number 5.4 is the important
one and the other numbers are like minor revisions or upgrades. I guess
we will have to wait and see what 5.5 looks like and how far along it is.

On 23.12.2021 at 11:52, Nic scribbled:

> On 12/23/21 10:27 AM, Big Al wrote:
> > On 12/22/21 5:15 PM, this is what Nic wrote:
> >> I am currently using Linux Mint 19.1 Tessa and kernal 5.4.0.67,
> >> which has been superseded, my question is, is there any advantage
> >> to upgrade my kernal? I question the need for new kernals, which I
> >> understand that the new kernals are attempting to address the
> >> needs of the new hardwares,  so if I am not having problems is
> >> there any advatage to upgrading the kernal?
> >>
> >>
> > I'm on linux Mint Cinnamon 20.2 and the kernel there is 5.4.0.91.
> > Still the 5.4 kernel.  Which is according to the list that Andrei
> > Z. posted, is good till 2025.  So I don't see your concern.
> >
> Was just wondering if it is important that I upgrade and run the risk
> of wrecking a working system. So the the big number 5.4 is the
> important one and the other numbers are like minor revisions or
> upgrades. I guess we will have to wait and see what 5.5 looks like
> and how far along it is.

The current mainline kernel is 5.15, not 5.5. As the matter of fact,
5.5 has already been discontinued a long time ago. 5.4 is however a
long-term-support kernel and will still be kept updated with bug fixes
and security patches for a couple more years.

There is also 5.10 as another long-term-support kernel, and 5.15 is
scheduled to be LTS as well once 5.16 is declared the stable mainline.

--
With respect,
= Aragorn

On 12/23/21 12:27 PM, Aragorn wrote:
> On 23.12.2021 at 11:52, Nic scribbled:
>
>> On 12/23/21 10:27 AM, Big Al wrote:
>>> On 12/22/21 5:15 PM, this is what Nic wrote:
>>>> I am currently using Linux Mint 19.1 Tessa and kernal 5.4.0.67,
>>>> which has been superseded, my question is, is there any advantage
>>>> to upgrade my kernal? I question the need for new kernals, which I
>>>> understand that the new kernals are attempting to address the
>>>> needs of the new hardwares,  so if I am not having problems is
>>>> there any advatage to upgrading the kernal?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I'm on linux Mint Cinnamon 20.2 and the kernel there is 5.4.0.91.
>>> Still the 5.4 kernel.  Which is according to the list that Andrei
>>> Z. posted, is good till 2025.  So I don't see your concern.
>>>
>> Was just wondering if it is important that I upgrade and run the risk
>> of wrecking a working system. So the the big number 5.4 is the
>> important one and the other numbers are like minor revisions or
>> upgrades. I guess we will have to wait and see what 5.5 looks like
>> and how far along it is.
> The current mainline kernel is 5.15, not 5.5. As the matter of fact,
> 5.5 has already been discontinued a long time ago. 5.4 is however a
> long-term-support kernel and will still be kept updated with bug fixes
> and security patches for a couple more years.
>
> There is also 5.10 as another long-term-support kernel, and 5.15 is
> scheduled to be LTS as well once 5.16 is declared the stable mainline.
>
These kernals do show up in my software update manager, probably for
later versions of LM

On 12/23/21 12:34 PM, this is what Nic wrote:
> On 12/23/21 12:27 PM, Aragorn wrote:
>> On 23.12.2021 at 11:52, Nic scribbled:
>>
>>> On 12/23/21 10:27 AM, Big Al wrote:
>>>> On 12/22/21 5:15 PM, this is what Nic wrote:
>>>>> I am currently using Linux Mint 19.1 Tessa and kernal 5.4.0.67,
>>>>> which has been superseded, my question is, is there any advantage
>>>>> to upgrade my kernal? I question the need for new kernals, which I
>>>>> understand that the new kernals are attempting to address the
>>>>> needs of the new hardwares,  so if I am not having problems is
>>>>> there any advatage to upgrading the kernal?
>>>>>
>>>> I'm on linux Mint Cinnamon 20.2 and the kernel there is 5.4.0.91.
>>>> Still the 5.4 kernel.  Which is according to the list that Andrei
>>>> Z. posted, is good till 2025.  So I don't see your concern.
>>> Was just wondering if it is important that I upgrade and run the risk
>>> of wrecking a working system. So the the big number 5.4 is the
>>> important one and the other numbers are like minor revisions or
>>> upgrades. I guess we will have to wait and see what 5.5 looks like
>>> and how far along it is.
>> The current mainline kernel is 5.15, not 5.5.  As the matter of fact,
>> 5.5 has already been discontinued a long time ago.  5.4 is however a
>> long-term-support kernel and will still be kept updated with bug fixes
>> and security patches for a couple more years.
>>
>> There is also 5.10 as another long-term-support kernel, and 5.15 is
>> scheduled to be LTS as well once 5.16 is declared the stable mainline.
>>
> These kernals do show up in my software update manager, probably for later versions of LM
>
If they are in your update manager they are for your software. Linux only shows you software that you can download. It's not like a web
site advertising some great program but oops, it's not for your OS.

--
Linux Mint Cinnamon 20.2 64bit, Dell Inspiron 5570 laptop
Quad Core i7-8550U, 16G Memory, 512G SSD, 750G & 1TB HDDs

Nic wrote:
> Apologies I meant to say they are _*not*_ in update manager.

So, your original qx:

> so if I am not having problems is there any advatage to upgrading the kernal?

.... was about 'going out' somehow somewhere and finding a newer kernel
that is NOT in your update mgr?

I was assuming this whole thread was about using your update mgr.

--
Mike Easter

On 12/24/21 9:29 AM, this is what Mike Easter wrote:
> Nic wrote:
>> Apologies I meant to say they are _*not*_ in update manager.
>
> So, your original qx:
>
>>  so if I am not having problems is there any advatage to upgrading the kernal?
>
> ... was about 'going out' somehow somewhere and finding a newer kernel that is NOT in your update mgr?
>
> I was assuming this whole thread was about using your update mgr.
>
Odd Mike that in Thunderbird, your reply to Nic came out threaded and showing as replying to me. Big_Al
Not sure how TB screwed that up. I can see from the first lines your reply is to Nic.

--
Linux Mint Cinnamon 20.2 64bit, Dell Inspiron 5570 laptop
Quad Core i7-8550U, 16G Memory, 512G SSD, 750G & 1TB HDDs

On 12/24/21 9:29 AM, Mike Easter wrote:
> Nic wrote:
>> Apologies I meant to say they are _*not*_ in update manager.
>
> So, your original qx:
>
>>  so if I am not having problems is there any advatage to upgrading
>> the kernal?
>
> ... was about 'going out' somehow somewhere and finding a newer kernel
> that is NOT in your update mgr?
>
> I was assuming this whole thread was about using your update mgr.
>
Now you are confusing me. The updated kernals that Argorn wrote about
are not in my Update Manager, remember in the op I stated my LM version
and the kernal updates I have available to me.

Nic wrote:
> in the op I stated my LM version and the kernal updates I have available
> to me.

In the OP you said:

> I am currently using Linux Mint 19.1 Tessa and kernal 5.4.0.67, which has been superseded,

The current Mint 19 is 19.3 which likely has a higher kernel (after the
dash) 5.4.0-xx; my live Mint 20.1 has 5.4.0-58 and offers -91 and 20.2
live default has -74 and offers -91 (if I update the mgr).

I assumed that when you said 'superseded' you meant that your update mgr
offered a higher dash number than -67.

--
Mike Easter

I have a mothballed HTPC that will one day be brought into service.
From memory, I think it has Mint 19.3.

By the time it gets brought back up it will have been unused for about a year.

I am dreading the updating because it means downloading and compling the latest driver for the TBS DVB-TV card to match the latest kernel.

It always causes problems. :(

--
Mint 20.2, kernel 5.4.0-88-generic, Cinnamon 5.0.5
running on an AMD Phenom II X4 Black edition processor with 16GB of DRAM.

pinnerite wrote:
> I have a mothballed HTPC that will one day be brought into service.
> From memory, I think it has Mint 19.3.
>
> By the time it gets brought back up it will have been unused for about a year.
>
> I am dreading the updating because it means downloading and compling the latest driver for the TBS DVB-TV card to match the latest kernel.
>
> It always causes problems. :(
>
The security considerations would depend on how you use the device.

I use an OEM WinXP w/ an outdated/unsupported Chrome browser, but not in
any way that its security deficiencies would endanger it.

If you only use the 19.3 for its TV, maybe its 'potential' security
risks are minimal.

--
Mike Easter

On 12/24/21 10:41 AM, Mike Easter wrote:
> Nic wrote:
>> in the op I stated my LM version and the kernal updates I have
>> available to me.
>
> In the OP you said:
>
>> I am currently using Linux Mint 19.1 Tessa and kernal 5.4.0.67, which
>> has been superseded,
>
> The current Mint 19 is 19.3 which likely has a higher kernel (after
> the dash) 5.4.0-xx; my live Mint 20.1 has 5.4.0-58 and offers -91 and
> 20.2 live default has -74 and offers -91 (if I update the mgr).
>
> I assumed that when you said 'superseded' you meant that your update
> mgr offered a higher dash number than -67.
>
That is correct. It offers 5.4.0-91 which is supported to April 2023.

Nic wrote:
> Mike Easter wrote:
>> Nic wrote:
>>> in the op I stated my LM version and the kernal updates I have
>>> available to me.
>>
>> In the OP you said:
>>
>>> I am currently using Linux Mint 19.1 Tessa and kernal 5.4.0.67, which
>>> has been superseded,
>>
>> The current Mint 19 is 19.3 which likely has a higher kernel (after
>> the dash) 5.4.0-xx; my live Mint 20.1 has 5.4.0-58 and offers -91 and
>> 20.2 live default has -74 and offers -91 (if I update the mgr).
>>
>> I assumed that when you said 'superseded' you meant that your update
>> mgr offered a higher dash number than -67.
>>
> That is correct. It offers 5.4.0-91 which is supported to April 2023.
>
In my opinion, stable linux kernel versions such as 5.4.0-xx undergo
security issues and fixes. Here's is a page example for 5.4.0-xx

https://ubuntu.com/security/notices/USN-4945-1 USN-4945-1: Linux kernel
vulnerabilities

And I believe it would be more appropriate to *assume* that such kernel
upgrades as -58 to -91 includes security fixes than to think that it
does/they do/ /not/.

So, purely from a *security* point of view, as opposed to from a
'convenience' point of view, it would be *more* secure to upgrade the
kernel, just like it would be more secure to upgrade those items listed
by the upgrade mgr as /security/ upgrade icons.

As opposed to, say, choosing to NOT upgrade those app/s which do not
show the security icon in the mgr.

And, in order to mitigate breaking something difficult to fix, in this
case one should use the timeshift backup function to enable ease of
undoing anything that goes wrong w/ such a kernel update.

There is a tendency for people to fall into two camps in a black and
white world, those who always update and those who almost never update
unless they have to. But some people are going to be in-between and
update 'some things' and not others.

I think kernel updates of the type we are talking about which are
specific for your version, a LTS kernel in a LTS Ubuntu repo are
appropriate.

--
Mike Easter

On 12/24/21 1:40 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
> Nic wrote:
>> Mike Easter wrote:
>>> Nic wrote:
>>>> in the op I stated my LM version and the kernal updates I have
>>>> available to me.
>>>
>>> In the OP you said:
>>>
>>>> I am currently using Linux Mint 19.1 Tessa and kernal 5.4.0.67,
>>>> which has been superseded,
>>>
>>> The current Mint 19 is 19.3 which likely has a higher kernel (after
>>> the dash) 5.4.0-xx; my live Mint 20.1 has 5.4.0-58 and offers -91
>>> and 20.2 live default has -74 and offers -91 (if I update the mgr).
>>>
>>> I assumed that when you said 'superseded' you meant that your update
>>> mgr offered a higher dash number than -67.
>>>
>> That is correct. It offers 5.4.0-91 which is supported to April 2023.
>>
> In my opinion, stable linux kernel versions such as 5.4.0-xx undergo
> security issues and fixes.  Here's is a page example for 5.4.0-xx
>
> https://ubuntu.com/security/notices/USN-4945-1  USN-4945-1: Linux
> kernel vulnerabilities
>
> And I believe it would be more appropriate to *assume* that such
> kernel upgrades as -58 to -91 includes security fixes than to think
> that it does/they do/ /not/.
>
> So, purely from a *security* point of view, as opposed to from a
> 'convenience' point of view, it would be *more* secure to upgrade the
> kernel, just like it would be more secure to upgrade those items
> listed by the upgrade mgr as /security/ upgrade icons.
>
> As opposed to, say, choosing to NOT upgrade those app/s which do not
> show the security icon in the mgr.
>
> And, in order to mitigate breaking something difficult to fix, in this
> case one should use the timeshift backup function to enable ease of
> undoing anything that goes wrong w/ such a kernel update.
>
> There is a tendency for people to fall into two camps in a black and
> white world, those who always update and those who almost never update
> unless they have to.  But some people are going to be in-between and
> update 'some things' and not others.
>
> I think kernel updates of the type we are talking about which are
> specific for your version, a LTS kernel in a LTS Ubuntu repo are
> appropriate.
>
I will update, but first I will do a hard backup, don't like timeshift
had some problems early on, maybe to my lack of knowledge or something.

Nic wrote:
> I will update, but first I will do a hard backup, don't like timeshift
> had some problems early on, maybe to my lack of knowledge or something.

Having a good backup plan that you like and that you have demonstrated
performs to your satisfaction is a very important condition.

Maybe we should all read and test and think about that; which one would
be best for us.

--
Mike Easter

On 12/24/21 3:59 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
> Nic wrote:
>> I will update, but first I will do a hard backup, don't like
>> timeshift had some problems early on, maybe to my lack of knowledge
>> or something.
>
> Having a good backup plan that you like and that you have demonstrated
> performs to your satisfaction is a very important condition.
>
> Maybe we should all read and test and think about that; which one
> would be best for us.
>
The opening for a great sub chapter in this thread. The best way to
backup a system.

Merry Christmas

Nic wrote:

>>
> I will update, but first I will do a hard backup, don't like timeshift
> had some problems early on, maybe to my lack of knowledge or something.
>

I also have problems with Timeshift. It makes my daily backups
perfectly, but for some reason a restore doesn't work from within the
program. Running a restore in a terminal does seem to always work. Just do:

sudo timeshift --restore