From: Jeff D. <jd...@ka...> - 2003-03-05 02:17:32
|
uki...@me... said: > i am trying to apply a uml patch to the red hat 7.3 distribution. > none of the kernel patches i tried seemed to work RH heavily patches their kernel, so that patches against the stock tree are likely not to go in cleanly or at all. > (including the obvious 2.4.18-3). What's obvious about 2.4.18-3? Jeff |
From: Ulas K. <uki...@me...> - 2003-03-05 02:23:06
|
hi jeff. do all of rh's patches come from linux's own bug fixes and patches? if = not, then the problem is a tough one. many people are using rh so i = though maybe somebody knows the exact diffs to apply to make it work. i say obvious because rh claims their 7.3 distribution is based on = 2.4.18-3. ulas -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Dike [mailto:jd...@ka...] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 6:10 PM To: Ulas Kirazci Cc: use...@li... Subject: Re: [uml-user] patching uml onto red hat 7.3 source=20 uki...@me... said: > i am trying to apply a uml patch to the red hat 7.3 distribution. > none of the kernel patches i tried seemed to work=20 RH heavily patches their kernel, so that patches against the stock tree = are likely not to go in cleanly or at all. > (including the obvious 2.4.18-3). What's obvious about 2.4.18-3? Jeff |
From: Net Llama! <net...@li...> - 2003-03-05 02:51:40
|
On 03/04/03 18:22, Ulas Kirazci wrote: > hi jeff. > > do all of rh's patches come from linux's own bug fixes and patches? if not, then the problem is a tough one. many people are using rh so i though maybe somebody knows the exact diffs to apply to make it work. > > i say obvious because rh claims their 7.3 distribution is based on 2.4.18-3. What is 2.4.18-3? That is nothing that Linus ever released. He released a 2.4.18, which is not even close to the same thing as 2.4.18-3. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ L. Friedman net...@li... Linux Step-by-step & TyGeMo: http://netllama.ipfox.com 6:45pm up 50 days, 2:09, 2 users, load average: 0.63, 0.95, 0.85 |
From: Ben R. <Be...@um...> - 2003-03-07 18:28:11
|
> > What is 2.4.18-3? That is nothing that Linus ever released. He > released a 2.4.18, which is not even close to the same thing as 2.4.18-3. You probably already know that RedHat distributes their software using a package management system called RPM, The number following the "-" is the "epoch" number and in RedHat's RPM schema this is the most significant digit in versioning. So for example in an OS release (like 8.0 for example) you might have a software package like: mypkg-1.0.0-1.i386.rpm The maintainer of the software package may have moved on to a new stable version 1.2 and finds a significant bug or security hole and releases version 1.2.1 RedHat tries to avoid version changes within an OS release to reduce software compatability and depency issues, so they would (I guess) get the source for version 1.2 and version 1.2.1 and compare the diffs between those two versions to see what code changes *specifically* addressed the security hole or bug. Then they would check the code in the version 1.0.0 that they released to see if that same section of code existed in their "maintained" version. If so they would only apply the code changes that fixed the problems and then they would release: mypkg-1.0.0-2.i386.rpm Then when OS release 8.1 comes out they might include: mypkg-1.2.1-3.i386.rpm Also, RedHat pulls in lots of kernel addons that are not in the standard kernel tree, like LVM support in RedHat 8 for example. (I think), or the broadcom crypto card kernel code. RedHat also has special tweaks to the drivers to make sure that they autodetect the HW that is released by RedHat certified hardware vendors like Dell and IBM. RedHat is not alone in this, Mandrake, SUSE and even Gentoo all have kernel's that are "based" on a standard kernel release, but have been modified. BTW, I downloaded UML'ized and compiled and ran a stock 2.4.18 kernel on a Redhat 7.2 box with no problems. The only issue that I had was that you have to run "make menuconfig" and then save the config before you use "make xconfig".... When I just untarred the kernel source and used "make xconfig" then the compile would fail. I don't know why??? -Ben. (RHCE) |
From: Malcolm T. <ma...@co...> - 2003-03-05 03:06:10
|
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 06:22:57PM -0800, Ulas Kirazci wrote: > do all of rh's patches come from linux's own bug fixes and patches? No. > if not, then the problem is a tough one. Yes. > many people are using rh so i though maybe somebody knows the exact > diffs to apply to make it work. > > i say obvious because rh claims their 7.3 distribution is based on 2.4.18-3. Red Hat distributions never use stock kernels, so although it feels like a natural choice, you are not close to patching a standard kernel source here. Is there some special reason you wish to apply it to the patched Red Hat source kernel? If it is just to avoid a multi-megabyte download, then you can get around this by installing the kernel-source rpm and then grabbing the unpatched source from the SOURCES/ directory where it was installed (since rpms just apply patches to the pristine source). Malcolm -- If at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence that you tried. |
From: Jeff D. <jd...@ka...> - 2003-03-05 04:09:45
|
uki...@me... said: > i say obvious because rh claims their 7.3 distribution is based on > 2.4.18-3. I suppose I should be flattered that you think RH is based on my tree, but it turns out not to be true. Jeff |