Re: Kernel Update- Implications of FC2 & FC3 Kernel Synchronization?

[David Curry]

Dave Jones wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 11:01:44PM -0500, David Curry wrote:
>  > Question from a neophyte struggling to better understand differences 
>  > between fedora releases and between fedora release and update modes.
>  > 
>  > Kernel updates released today for both FC2 and FC3 have a common version 
>  > number: 2.6.10-1.770 and are distinguishable only by the tailing release 
>  > designators _FC2 and _FC3.  In past, there appeared a difference in 
>  > kernel numbers as well.  Does the move to commonality of version 
>  > numbering have any practical or functional significance for users of the 
>  > older release?
>
> I bumped from .14 -> .770 in FC2 as some users pointed out that it was
> hard to see which FC3 release a FC2 update related to.
>
>  > This question is in part prompted by the yesterday's message thread, 
>  > "fc3 with kernel 2.6.10 stresses hard disk".  2.6.10_FC2 kernels have 
>  > been available for some time and I have been running them so the thread 
>  > prompted the question as to whether the "stresses hard disk" phenomenon 
>  > applied to FC2 as well as FC3.  (Release notes point out that Fedora 
>  > Core 3 changes included "Kernel and e2fsprogs support for online growing 
>  > of ext3 file systems.)
>
> For the most part, the kernels are identical. The only real differences
> between the two are ..
>
> - The config options that are used to build the two kernels
>  (some stuff got deprecated in FC3)
> - The generation of kernel-sourcecode for FC2 kernels.
> - a bunch of syntactical changes in the kernel spec for each release too.
>   (Ie, FC2's mkinitrd takes slightly different command line
>   arguments to the one in FC3). It's easy to spot those bits if you're curious,
>   they're bracketed in %if %{FC2} or the like..
> - different compiler used to generate the RPMs.
>
> 		Dave
>
>   
>  
Thanks, Dave.