RHEL Kernel Versions

[Bill McGonigle]

On May 14, 2008, at 07:51, Kenny Lussier wrote:

> I have no problems with that. The predicament that I have is
> that I have developers telling me that they need features that are  
> in a
> certain kernel (in this case 2.6.20), and I have no real way of  
> knowing what
> 2.6.9-67 equates to. I will have to find out the exact features of the
> kernel they are looking for, and go through the changelogs to see  
> if those
> features are included.

Yeah, good call.  Your solution is technically sound, but buying RHEL  
and running it in an unsupported may be economically inefficient.  Of  
course, if you have another problem with the system they'll still  
help you, especially if you can reboot into the supported kernel.   
 From personal experience, though, if it's even ancillarily related  
to an unsupported kernel you'll get nothing (e.g. I once had a udev  
problem which was triggered by a firewire drive but I got no help  
since firewire wasn't in their supported kernel - I ended up working  
out the problem via mailing list with the udev guys).  RHEL is the  
best tool for some jobs, just not all.

I'm hardly in a position to complain either; from those kinds of  
experiences I learned there was a decent market for helping folks  
support CentOS installs in situations that aren't RHEL-support  
compatible.

-Bill

-----
Bill McGonigle, Owner           Work: 603.448.4440
BFC Computing, LLC              Home: 603.448.1668
bill at bfccomputing.com           Cell: 603.252.2606
http://www.bfccomputing.com/    Page: 603.442.1833
Blog: http://blog.bfccomputing.com/
VCard: http://bfccomputing.com/vcard/bill.vcf

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3833 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/attachments/20080514/ff58f3fd/attachment.bin