[CentOS] Re: Putting CentOS 5.2 kernel on CentOS 4.x

Fong Vang sudoyang at gmail.com
Sat Oct 4 00:39:44 UTC 2008


So you're saying that the CentOS 4.x system is married with the 2.6.9
kernel?  Maybe the packaging of the kernel RPM is different between 4.x and
5.x, but why would a 5.x kernel not work on a 4.x system, especially
considering you can always download the latest kernel from the kernel source
tree and run that so this doesn't sound right.

I just need the later kernel, not the new glibc which will break
compatibility.

On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 4:55 PM, William L. Maltby
<CentOS4Bill at triad.rr.com>wrote:

>
> On Fri, 2008-10-03 at 16:21 -0700, Scott Silva wrote:
> > on 10-3-2008 2:48 PM Fong Vang spake the following:
> > > Has anyone tried to install a CentOS 5.x kernel on a CentOS 4.x system?
> > > Is this doable?  I"m aware of the dependencies but I'm curious if
> anyone
> > > has done this successfully.
> > >
> > > Basically, we have a few hundred 4.x systems that cannot be upgraded to
> > > 5.x, yet, but we do need the kernel update to fix the XFS problem as
> > > described here: http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=3125
> > >
> > You would be on your own with that! Do you have a non-critical system you
> can
> > test on? You would probably need to get the source rpm and build it on a
> 4.x
> > devel system.
>
> Hmmm... Reaching through the half-heimers-fogged brain...
>
> ISTR that the critical item is the APIs (binary compat) provided by
> glibc. If so, the glibc-2.5-24.i686 on 5.2 and the 2.3.4-2.41 are
> probably different enough that binary compatibility would be broken.
>
> Further, compiling the recent kernel on 4.x might be also difficult
> because the source compatibility might be broken (although not certain)
> due to parameter changes introduced in the newer kernel version.
>
> But, that's a whole bunch of "ifs" that may be worth investigating,
> depending on available time, resources and time constraints.
>
> If one does get a clean compile and no apps break, very fortunate. If
> the source must be changed, be sure to maintain diffs that can be
> applied when new versions with critical fixes (like security) appear.
>
> Overall, my personal bias would be to avoid the whole scenario.
>
> > <snip sig stuff>
>
> If any of my above is FUD, please forgive. It's hard to recall so much
> from so long ago.
>
> --
> Bill
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20081003/49fa6e39/attachment.htm


More information about the CentOS mailing list