On Thu, 2006-03-23 at 12:57 -0800, Troy Engel wrote:
I have a need to use the unsupported kernel for one feature only (AFP/Appletalk support). Never having had to use it before, I'm unsure of what's all in it other than reading it's config file.
From those that do use it -- is it considered stable enough to use in lightweight production? I'm debating the use of it versus wasting my time rebuilding the normal kernel with AFP enabled. Seeing as how this is an underpowered machine (Duron 900/512mb), using a prebuilt would be nice.
---- presuming you are talking about CentOS-3...yes, install the kernel unsupported. Not a big deal...upstream didn't want to support the modules themselves so they separated them so you knew up front what the rules were.
You don't need the appletalk module to do afp over tcp...I tend to use it on RHEL 3 systems where there's OS-9 Macintoshes. At home, I am using CentOS-4 and upstream never did supply a kernel-unsupported so the choices there are either to use centos-plus kernel or to build the module yourself (not too hard) ----
-te
ps: why oh why did RH decide to disable this? a simple upgrade of a RH9 machine now turns ugly. :-/ Do they think nobody uses Appletalk anymore? WTH.
---- OS 9 is pretty much dead. You shouldn't need the appletalk kernel module with OS X systems.
as for turning an upgrade ugly...I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill...if that's all you got to bitch about - you should be very happy when you see how easy it is...
CentOS-3 yum install kernel-unsupported # Uni-processor yum install kernel-smp-unsupported # SMP
CentOS-4 # something like this should work yum enablerepo=centosplus install \ kernel-2.6.9-34.106.unsupported.i686
I actually considered not responding because of the whining tone of your email. I hope that you are downloading the 2.0.3 netatalk source and compiling it yourself.
Craig