A new kernel is available for CentOS-3
https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2004-549.html refers
Updated files are :-
updates/i386/RPMS/ kernel-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.athlon.rpm kernel-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i686.rpm kernel-BOOT-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i386.rpm kernel-doc-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i386.rpm kernel-hugemem-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i686.rpm kernel-hugemem-unsupported-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i686.rpm kernel-smp-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.athlon.rpm kernel-smp-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i686.rpm kernel-smp-unsupported-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.athlon.rpm kernel-smp-unsupported-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i686.rpm kernel-source-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i386.rpm kernel-unsupported-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.athlon.rpm kernel-unsupported-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i686.rpm
updates/i386/SRPMS/ kernel-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.src.rpm
in addition I have built an i586 kernel that is now in addons :-
addons/i386/RPMS/ kernel-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i586.rpm kernel-unsupported-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i586.rpm
These kernel packages no longer have the .c0 release appendage, this is in order for them to be compatible with 3rd party kernel modules released for rhel that look for an exact match on kernel release build. The spec file is still changed to remove reference to Red Hat but the release level is left unchanged.
This is just one more little step towards our aim of full compatibility ...
To update to this new kernel version run
yum update
(assuming you havent modified the yum configuration to not update kernels)
Then you will need to reboot the machine to use the new kernel.
Lance
These packages are available here: http://mirror.caosity.org/centos-3/3.3/updates/i386/RPMS/
But should they also be here: http://mirror.caosity.org/centos-3/3.1/updates/i386/RPMS/
Also, does anyone know where this link came from: http://mirror.caosity.org/centos-3/2.0/
I think that is a poor idea. If it has a good reason for existing, then the version should be 2 or 2.1
John.
Lance Davis wrote:
A new kernel is available for CentOS-3
https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2004-549.html refers
Updated files are :-
updates/i386/RPMS/ kernel-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.athlon.rpm kernel-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i686.rpm kernel-BOOT-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i386.rpm kernel-doc-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i386.rpm kernel-hugemem-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i686.rpm kernel-hugemem-unsupported-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i686.rpm kernel-smp-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.athlon.rpm kernel-smp-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i686.rpm kernel-smp-unsupported-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.athlon.rpm kernel-smp-unsupported-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i686.rpm kernel-source-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i386.rpm kernel-unsupported-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.athlon.rpm kernel-unsupported-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i686.rpm
updates/i386/SRPMS/ kernel-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.src.rpm
in addition I have built an i586 kernel that is now in addons :-
addons/i386/RPMS/ kernel-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i586.rpm kernel-unsupported-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL.i586.rpm
These kernel packages no longer have the .c0 release appendage, this is in order for them to be compatible with 3rd party kernel modules released for rhel that look for an exact match on kernel release build. The spec file is still changed to remove reference to Red Hat but the release level is left unchanged.
This is just one more little step towards our aim of full compatibility ...
To update to this new kernel version run
yum update
(assuming you havent modified the yum configuration to not update kernels)
Then you will need to reboot the machine to use the new kernel.
Lance
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 14:03 +1100, John Newbigin wrote:
These packages are available here: http://mirror.caosity.org/centos-3/3.3/updates/i386/RPMS/
But should they also be here: http://mirror.caosity.org/centos-3/3.1/updates/i386/RPMS/
Fixed. Looks like they just didn't get synced over for 3.1. Thanks.
Also, does anyone know where this link came from: http://mirror.caosity.org/centos-3/2.0/
No clue, but it's not owned in such a way as I can fix it - you'll have to ask someone w/root.
-sv
On Monday, 06 December 2004, at 14:03:01 (+1100), John Newbigin wrote:
Also, does anyone know where this link came from: http://mirror.caosity.org/centos-3/2.0/
I think that is a poor idea. If it has a good reason for existing, then the version should be 2 or 2.1
I'm guessing the idea was so that someone could go from 2.1 -> 3 more easily, but I don't know for sure.
I've renamed it to 2.1.
Michael
On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, John Newbigin wrote:
Also, does anyone know where this link came from: http://mirror.caosity.org/centos-3/2.0/
I think that is a poor idea. If it has a good reason for existing, then the version should be 2 or 2.1
Of course it should be 2.1 - apologies -
the idea is that all of the centos stuff is accessed through centos/ eg centos/3.3 rather than centos-3
should make it easier for 4.0 etc
I will try to remember to use that when announcing updates
Lance
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 11:56 +0000, Lance Davis wrote:
On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, John Newbigin wrote:
Also, does anyone know where this link came from: http://mirror.caosity.org/centos-3/2.0/
I think that is a poor idea. If it has a good reason for existing, then the version should be 2 or 2.1
Of course it should be 2.1 - apologies -
the idea is that all of the centos stuff is accessed through centos/ eg centos/3.3 rather than centos-3
should make it easier for 4.0 etc
I will try to remember to use that when announcing updates
Why don't we do this make a centos dir at the same level as centos-3
then link centos-2, centos-3 etc etc etc all into there.
-sv
On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, seth vidal wrote:
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 11:56 +0000, Lance Davis wrote:
On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, John Newbigin wrote:
Also, does anyone know where this link came from: http://mirror.caosity.org/centos-3/2.0/
I think that is a poor idea. If it has a good reason for existing, then the version should be 2 or 2.1
Of course it should be 2.1 - apologies -
the idea is that all of the centos stuff is accessed through centos/ eg centos/3.3 rather than centos-3
should make it easier for 4.0 etc
I will try to remember to use that when announcing updates
Why don't we do this make a centos dir at the same level as centos-3
then link centos-2, centos-3 etc etc etc all into there.
like http://mirror.centos.org/centos/ ??
Regards Lance
-
John Newbigin -
Lance Davis -
Michael Jennings -
seth vidal