On Wed, 2010-08-04 at 00:41 -0700, Mark wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 9:30 PM, JohnS <jses27@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > You can do:
> > rpm -q --changelog kernel >> changelog.log \
> > rpm -q --changelog kernel-2.6.18-194.8.1.el5 >> changelog.log
> >
> > To view the changelog for patches and BZs Applied to the kernel or any
> > rpm. As in load up the newest one and run the command. I see a lot of
> > changes between the newest one and the one (194.3.1) that you tried and
> > said solved it. I would creep on up in versions to the newest one you
> > can run with out the problem then file a bug report with a good
> > description of the problem and type of hardware also (i think important
> > for your problem).
> >
>
> Egad - on the CentOS mirror I checked (USC), there are no kernels
> between 194.3.1 and 194.8.1.
Sun May 02 2010 Jiri Pirko <jpirko@xxxxxxxxxx> [2.6.18-194.3.1.el5]
Well that one you have. Why do you have it? Because I guess an
@CentOS.org Hat decided to build that one while all the other ones were
plain out skipped in-between? My ohh my the Heart and Soul was
forgotten. All of 4 - FOUR of them.
Effectively your stuck with the one you got that works or you have to
learn to build your own from the red hat sources.
> If I just build kernels from the Linux archives, would those just work
> as-is under CentOS? I haven't actually done that in a while, but if
> it's moderately safe using the "standard" spec files....
Maybe so be carefull. So insightfully what I do for my precious
customers on CentOS is I actually build the updates from the RH Sources
to keep them happy because some do like to plunder about when are
updates coming out.
Maybe the cache directory eatted them up?
John
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
