atom feed32 messages in com.redhat.nahant-beta-listRe: Supported filesystems?
FromSent OnAttachments
Don MacAskillSep 30, 2004 12:05 pm 
David AquilinaSep 30, 2004 12:22 pm 
Tim BurkeSep 30, 2004 12:38 pm 
Don MacAskillSep 30, 2004 2:04 pm 
Stephen J. SmoogenSep 30, 2004 2:21 pm 
Arjan van de VenSep 30, 2004 2:26 pm 
Arjan van de VenSep 30, 2004 2:35 pm 
Don MacAskillSep 30, 2004 3:11 pm 
Arjan van de VenSep 30, 2004 3:16 pm 
Don MacAskillSep 30, 2004 3:26 pm 
Don MacAskillSep 30, 2004 3:28 pm 
Tim BurkeSep 30, 2004 3:28 pm 
Arjan van de VenSep 30, 2004 3:32 pm 
Tim BurkeSep 30, 2004 3:33 pm 
Don MacAskillSep 30, 2004 3:35 pm 
Barry K. NathanSep 30, 2004 5:00 pm 
Tom 'spot' CallawaySep 30, 2004 6:52 pm 
Pasi PirhonenSep 30, 2004 7:45 pm 
Tom 'spot' CallawaySep 30, 2004 8:26 pm 
Pasi PirhonenSep 30, 2004 8:56 pm 
Ed GreshkoSep 30, 2004 11:54 pm 
Arjan van de VenOct 1, 2004 12:19 am 
Bernd BartmannOct 1, 2004 12:27 am 
Trond Eivind GlomsrødOct 1, 2004 4:10 am 
Stephen J. SmoogenOct 1, 2004 8:35 am 
Don MacAskillOct 1, 2004 10:33 am 
Don MacAskillOct 1, 2004 10:35 am 
Zate BergOct 5, 2004 11:35 am 
Arjan van de VenOct 5, 2004 11:40 am 
Milan KeršlágerOct 11, 2004 12:25 pm 
Arjan van de VenOct 11, 2004 12:46 pm 
Milan KeršlágerOct 11, 2004 1:50 pm 
Subject:Re: Supported filesystems?
From:Don MacAskill (do@smugmug.com)
Date:Oct 1, 2004 10:35:18 am
List:com.redhat.nahant-beta-list

Arjan van de Ven wrote:

On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 03:35:56PM -0700, Don MacAskill wrote:

On a semi-related side note, the few times I've had to recompile a kernel or module from the supported SRPMs, I've had issues where the "configs/*.config" config for my platform didn't work without lots of tweaking. (Some modules that were listed as being included wouldn't build, etc).

Is that intentional? I think it was on x86_64 every time, but I could be wrong.

the 2.4 "build your own kernel" process was extremely fragile. The 2.6 rpms fix that; the biggest step there is to include the headers for building modules against in the normal rpm in /lib, so that the fragile bit in the source can be avoided entirely. When I started at RH the 2.4 kernel was already the way it was and I didn't find a good way to get that fixed without doing a big compatibility break; with 2.6 there is such break anyway so it got fixed ;)

Man, I'm so glad to hear you say that. Thanks!

Don