Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 24 Dec 2003 09:49:03 +0100 | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | Subject | Re: Question on LFS in Redhat |
| |
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.
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |