On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 18:04:46 -0500 Matt Domsch <Matt_Domsch@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > There is likely a difference between what should be built-in in Fedora > vs what should be in RHEL. For RHEL, I really like the flexibility > that having something be modular allows. I have, on many occasions, > needed to replace modules using DKMS, including libata, sd_mod, > scsi_mod, ahci, etc. Basically anything that touches hardware > directly or one layer up. Not often, but enough that I like > modularity for this possibility. It has meant the difference between > being able to ship hardware, or not for another 6 months until new CDs > are spun... yeah I sent it to the Fedora list, not the RHEL list ;) I entirely assume that RHEL has it's own config options (SLUB instead of the slower-for-database SLUB, support for 4096 CPUs etc etc)... I'd hate to see a less optimal fedora for something rhel-ish like this that's different anyway. > -- If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org _______________________________________________ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
