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

Thu Apr 7 20:56:24 UTC 2011
Ljubomir Ljubojevic <office at plnet.rs>

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.