On Thu, 2005-11-17 at 12:17 -0500, Hilliard, Jay wrote: > Bryan J. Smith wrote: > > As Jim pointed out, at this point, it's better: > > > > A) to the "prep" (-bp) > > B) change what you want directly in the ./BUILD/kernel-* dir > > C) finish off the "build" (-bb) > > > > > I believe a -bb first removes ./BUILD/kernel-.... > You can modify config files and such in the SOURCE directory, but the > ./BUILD/kernel-* stuff get's removed and recreated when you do a build > (-bb) so any changes you make there will disappear. > > I usually do a -bp, use the BUILD directory to create new patches and > such, put them in the SOURCES directory, add the patches to my SPEC > file, then do the rpmbuild -bb. I always follow up with a (-bs) to > generate a new src.rpm for next time. > > I currently have about 6 patches in the Enterprise kernel that are > absolutely necessary, else I couldn't use it, so I disagree with the > idea of "Don't do it" I think the "Don't do it" should be expounded a little bit to this: CentOS is not gentoo or lfs ... it is a integrated solution in which all the parts fit together. They are built and tested that way. As much as possible, one should probably stay within the distributed packages and not build their own items or use any external programs. If that is not possible, then one should only change items that are required. AND ... you should only do that IF you know what you are doing :) In your case, it seems that you know exactly what you are doing ... In which case, CentOS makes a great base to build on. Just remember though, if you break it ... you get to keep both halves :) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20051117/7a493bc4/attachment-0004.sig>