On 03/19/2016 08:02 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote: > On 19/03/16 12:51, Jim Perrin wrote: >> >> >> On 03/19/2016 04:12 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote: >>> Bump. It seems the kernel binary rpm doesn't match the availability of >>> the sources for it. I can find no src.rpm matching the binary, and the >>> CentOS git doesn't seem to include this version: >>> https://git.centos.org/summary/rpms!kernel-aarch64 >>> >> >> You're looking in the wrong place. That's the git tree for the redhat >> provided rhel(sa) sources. We don't modify that tree. >> >> You want the sig-altarch7-aarch64 branch from >> https://git.centos.org/summary/sig-altarch!kernel.git > > Ah... My bad. > In that repository, README.md says to look for the c7 branch - and there > appears to be no c7 branch. > Is the "sig-altarch7-aarch64" branch the correct one to use going forward? In most cases, yes. I take the default rhelsa sources and periodically roll patches submitted to the list (and CVE fixes as needed) into that branch. I need to write up the 'patches accepted' guidelines on the wiki, to formalize that process a bit. >>> Can you please provide the full src.rpm used to build the >>> kernel-4.2.0-0.26.el7.1.aarch64 package? >> >> > http://people.centos.org/jperrin/srpms/kernel-aarch64-4.2.0-0.26.el7.1.src.rpm > > > Thanks, most appreciated. > >> I might also recommend a new thread rather than just a subject change >> for discussions like this. This message was very nearly lost to me as >> I've stopped watching the gigabyte board thread. > > Apologies, fixed now. No worries at all. I tend to skim top-level subject lines to see if there's something interesting or that I need to respond to. Otherwise I'd be buried in email for the rest of my life. Downside is that I sometimes miss threaded messages I should otherwise watch. One of these days I'll attempt some improvements in my mail filtering. -- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77