On 04/08/2011 11:35 AM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
As a general rule probably not. I did examine the result of the patched files and verified theyOn Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 7:16 AM, Steve Clark <sclark@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:On 04/07/2011 05:14 PM, Akemi Yagi wrote:I have just installed the kernel and will now start testing. Great. Please keep us posted. If the patches work as expected, they will be a worthy addition to the cplus kernel.I got a kernel built with the patches using the wiki and your notes in 0004586 (thanks). I am pleased to report that they appear to work as advertised. With: net.ipv6.conf.default.forwarding = 2 net.ipv6.conf.all.accept_ra = 2 Router solicitations were issued and router advertisements were accepted and I could still forward packets.Glad to hear things worked. Now that a new c6 kernel update is out, I will try and see if I could include the patches to this version ( 2.6.32-71.24.1 ).I didn't make new patches, I simply did %define with_fuzzy_patches 1Never used it. Is it "safe" to do that? looked OK. I guess I could cp'ed the files that were affected, then applied the patch by hand then ran gendiff against the new and the old to get a new patch, but in the end it is the same thing, other than having to turn on with_fuzzy_patches. Good to know.Also what should the normal rpmbuild line be? I ended up doing rpmbuild -bb --target=`uname -m` kernel.spec --with firmware --without debug --without debuginfo The first time I didn't have --with firmware and the kernel wouldn't install.Yes, C6 kernels require kernel-firmware. I build it with --target noarch. --
Stephen Clark NetWolves Sr. Software Engineer III Phone: 813-579-3200 Fax: 813-882-0209 Email: steve.clark@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.netwolves.com |
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
