[CentOS] Testing kernel and xfs/netatalk

Johnny Hughes mailing-lists at hughesjr.com
Thu Jul 20 19:23:12 UTC 2006


On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 22:16 +0100, James Pearson wrote:
> On 17/07/06, Alex Palenschat <alex at nssmgmt.com> wrote:
> > I recently took over a x86_64 CentOS 4.0 server running an "unsupported"
> > kernel. On examining the box it seems that perhaps it is because of the
> > use of xfs and netatalk. I would like to update the box to 4.3. I think
> > I can do away with the netatalk, but doing away with xfs would require a
> > substantial amount of work.
> >
> > Questions:
> >
> > 1: In reading the archive of this list there was a post regarding the
> > kernel in the Testing repo supporting xfs. Is this the case and if so,
> > would it be a "bad idea" to run that kernel without essentially runnning
> > a test box using all packages from the testing repo?
> > 2: Does the same kernel include netatalk support? It would be easier to
> > leave the netatalk in place if that were so.
> > 3: Should I just bite the bullet and get rid of the xfs? I'm not sure
> > what predicated the choice of filesystem in the first place.
> >
> > Any thoughts/comments would be welcome,
> 
> If you don't need netatalk, then upgrade to 4.3 and use the
> kernel-module-xfs module from
> http://dev.centos.org/centos/4/testing/x86_64/RPMS/
> 
> This has more up to date XFS code than the centosplus "unsupported" kernel.
> 
> James Pearson
> _______________________________________________

Agreed :)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20060720/356d4492/attachment.sig>


More information about the CentOS mailing list