[CentOS] Where is the kernel source code???

[Kevin Krieser]

On Dec 18, 2005, at 9:19 PM, Rodrigo Barbosa wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 08:22:36PM -0600, Kevin Krieser wrote:
>> Another, fatal, use of the standard X86 kernel provided by Redhat,
>> and I assume in the unsupported kernel, is the requirement of at
>> least a 686 (or Athlon) CPU.  When you have to support 586 based
>> systems, you have to, at a minimum, recompile the kernel.  And
>> replace the 686 glibc with the 386 version.  And replace the SSL
>> libraries too._______________________________________________
>
> Okey, so someone please clarify this for me:
>
> # uname -a
> Linux XXXXXXX.XXXXXXXXXX.com 2.6.9-11.EL #1 Wed Jun 8 20:20:13 CDT  
> 2005 i586 i586 i386 GNU/Linux
>
> # cat /etc/redhat-release
> CentOS release 4.1 (Final)
>
> # cat /proc/cpuinfo
> processor       : 0
> vendor_id       : AuthenticAMD
> cpu family      : 5
> model           : 7
> model name      : AMD-K6tm w/ multimedia extensions
>
> # rpm -q --qf "%{ARCH}\n" kernel
> i586
>
>
> Unless you mean that CentOS provides 586 kernels, even if RH doesn't.
>
> In any case, I think it needs clarification.
>
> This is a 4.1 machine, yes, but we do have
>
> http://mirror.centos.org/centos/4/updates/i386/RPMS/ 
> kernel-2.6.9-22.0.1.EL.i586.rpm
>
> avaliable.
>
> OpenSSL is also avaliable on the i386, i586 and i686 flavors on the  
> CentOS 4
> updates repository.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> - --
> Rodrigo Barbosa <rodrigob at suespammers.org>
> "Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur"
> "Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFDpibdpdyWzQ5b5ckRAgCSAKCXF6FlykLUiOGEwyAXDA25u/HaUACfe/ba
> c60L0bdvyeboy/sV4w1j0G0=
> =kED8
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Apparently Centos recompiles it for 586.  I figured that they would  
have the same limitation in this regard than Redhat.

Still wouldn't have helped since, up until recently, we also had to  
support 486's.

At work we still have to use Redhat, due to customer requirements.   
For my own personal computers, though, CentOS is a fine alternative  
since I'm not in the mood for the rapid changes in the Fedora line.