[CentOS] CentOSPlus kernel (Was: Centos 6 Update?)

Thu Apr 7 22:22:55 UTC 2011
samuel machua <samnjugu at gmail.com>

On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 22:56:24 +0200
Ljubomir Ljubojevic <office at plnet.rs> wrote:

> Rob Kampen wrote:
> > Tom Bishop wrote:
> >> This is excellent information Akemi, provides opportunities for
> >> folks to dig in and specific information that is needed and where
> >> to go to learn more...Thanks! :)
> >>
> >> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Akemi Yagi <amyagi at gmail.com 
> >> <mailto:amyagi at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >>     Changing the subject line for good ...
> >>
> >>     On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Lamar Owen <lowen at pari.edu
> >>     <mailto:lowen at pari.edu>> wrote:
> >>     > On Thursday, April 07, 2011 11:23:51 AM Brunner, Brian T.
> >>     > wrote:
> >>     >> AIUI: In previous releases, RH distributed source + patches.
> >>      Starting
> >>     >> 6.0 RH releases patched source.  This makes backing out a 
> >> patch, or
> >>     >> backporting patches from future development in Fedora (e.g.)
> >>     far more
> >>     >> nightmarish than before.
> >>     >
> >>     > This one doesn't impact the CentOS core rebuild.  It
> >>     > would/could
> >>     impact CentOSPlus.
> >>
> >>     Yes, it _could_ affect the centosplus kernel. This point was 
> >> addressed
> >>     early on when RHEL-6 was released back in Nov 2010. See:
> >>
> >>     http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=4586
> >>
> >>     Point 2 (note 12051) is the one that is relevant. I welcome any
> >>     feedback / suggestions for the proposed method I outlined
> >> there. While you are there, look also at the issues described for
> >> Point 3 (note 12052). Anyone can help in there as well. :)
> >>
> >>     So far, "luckily" centosplus kernels are "ahead of" the distro
> >> kernel in that they have been built and are available for testing
> >> (see note 12502).
> >>
> > This post has led me to lots of information about the CentOS build 
> > process and makes me offer the following comment:-/
> > 
> > PLEASE ALL - have a look around the wiki and bugs - there is heaps
> > of information about the status of the various build processes and
> > even how to do it yourself - at least from a getting started level
> > - I'm sure once one gets into it there would be some questions, but
> > just like here 
> > - if one shows what has been tried, and the specific problem 
> > encountered, and what attempts have been made to resolve the
> > problem - then help would be available to assist you in the forward
> > direction.
> > 
> > Rather than making a nuisance and noise on the lists and expecting 
> > digested sound bites to appease your thirst for information from
> > the folk that do the work - go have a look.
> > 
> > It is readily apparent that the build process is very reliant upon 
> > having "all one's ducks in a row" and one minor version change in a 
> > dependent source file means the output will not be the binary match
> > with the upstream provider that CentOS delivers. Thus the process
> > gives new meaning to the word "iterative".
> > 
> > My thanks to all those doing the painstaking work of making it work 
> > right the first time - I for one, am not detail oriented enough to
> > do this kind of work, and so I suspect are many of those on this
> > list. Please do not get discouraged by those who lash out on the
> > various forum but accept this heart felt THANK YOU from a long time
> > user that appreciates all that you do.
> > 
> > I see comments about not being able to rely upon CentOS for
> > business use 
> > - I beg to differ, I use CentOS for my business and am very
> > satisfied with the quality of the product.
> > There are certainly some business uses where the time-frame of the 
> > CentOS build process is a problem - if that is the case then there
> > are alternatives - they do cost money.
> > Pay your money and make your choice - no money.......accept what is 
> > CentOS and see if there is somewhere you can contribute to a very 
> > informative and helpful infrastructure - preferably in a polite and 
> > positive manner.
> > Thanks for reading.
> 
> +1000
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

+1001