On Wed, 23 May 2007, Matt Hyclak wrote:
On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 04:54:12PM -0400, Steve Thompson enlightened us:
I upgraded to 4.5 without any problems, but I did have to account for the
fact that the new kernel can potentially reorder NICs on certain HP and
Dell servers, so all was well after I switched the network cable...
See: http://kbase.redhat.com/faq/FAQ_46_10460.shtm
I wonder whose brilliant idea it was to introduce such a major change in a
_patch release_?
This has already been hashed out on the nahant-list. Someone from Redhat
gave an explanation. I will leave it up to you to decided if the explanation
is satisfactory to you or not.
Heh. I wasn't subscribed to nahant-list, so I went over there and took a
look. I am in agreement with those that thought that it was a stupid idea.
A very stupid idea. An extremely dumb stupid idea. The 4.4 -> 4.5 upgrade
broke my PE2900 systems, and I _do_ use HWADDR as well as bonding. The
bonding broke in a very spectacular manner. If that change was necessary,
it should have been introduced in RHEL5, and not in a patch release. Of
course, it has happened before, when the DLM locking protocols changed
between RHEL4 U2 and U3 (was it?), leaving non-functional clusters after
an up2date.
Steve
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
