Re: Question on LFS in Redhat

[Arjan van de Ven <arjanv@redhat.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1348 bytes --]

On Tue, Dec 23, 2003 at 11:58:27PM +0000, Dale Amon wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 23, 2003 at 04:38:38PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On Tue, 2003-12-23 at 16:10, Dale Amon wrote:
> > > If there are any Redhat folk around... could you tell
> > > me if you've included the LFS patches in your:
> > > 
> > > 	2.4.16-9smp
> > 
> > Red Hat never released a 2.4.16 kernel for production use.
> 
> Hmmm, that's what is showing and the Raidzone guy here in
> the UK told me they are stock... 

Raidzone does not ship a "stock" kernel but a kernel with a lot of changes
including changes to make their binary only modules possible (the legality
of this is left as an excercise to the reader).

You really shouldn't be running a 2.4.16 kernel (not without the latest
security patches for such a kernel from a distro) given the amount of security issues
fixed since... and since I don't think any distro ever shipped 2.4.16 (some
shipped 2.4.17, a bunch shipped 2.4.18 but even RH doesn't do patches for
that 2.4.18 tree anymore since they have been obsoleted by 2.4.20 and newer
kernels).


> > However we also never released a 2.4 kernel with the large BLOCK patch.
> > All 2.4 kernels we shipped can do files > 2 Gb of course.
> 
> But you wouldn't be able to handle file systems larger
> than 2TB then I presume?

correct.


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]