Specific Fedora kernel
davej at redhat.com
Sun Nov 9 22:05:18 UTC 2003
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 08:18:45PM +0000, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> > > Can't I just compile the latest 2.4 or 2.6 kernel from www.kernel.org?
> > Yes, with caveats that you lose the bits we add (see archive).
> To be a little rude in return -- I have always found RedHat's special kernels
> to be a snare and a delusion.
> Far from being better than the Torvald's version
> they nearly always had weird quirks.
> (Eg none of the ones I tried had Bluetooth properly installed.)
To the best of my knowledge, the bluetooth stuff we've shipped hasn't
deviated that much (if at all) from mainline. Having taken over the RHL9
kernel 'after the fact' however, I could be mistaken. Fedora should be
pretty close to stock (unless there's dramatic changes in the -ac patch
its based on, which I don't recall seeing).
If you're still having problems with the current Fedora kernel, please
bugzilla it, and I'll look into it. (Though the lack of bluetooth hardware
means I'll not be able to dig into too much -- read as: if it turns out
we're shipping stock code in regard to bluetooth the answer will likely
be "talk to upstream maintainer".)
> I'm perfectly happy to wait until an improvement gets Torvald's blessing.
> What I wouldn't be happy about would be if Fedora made some change,
> eg in an init script, which meant the official kernel no longer ran properly.
That would be a bug, and would be damned annoying. Remember that a majority
(if not all) of the kernel hackers employed by Red Hat spend some portion
of their time working on the upstream kernel too. Inability to test their
changes would result in many annoyed hackers 8-)
If you're aware of any problems in this regard, please bugzilla them.
The only possibility in this area that springs to mind right now is maybe
some quirks wrt 2.6, which is a) being worked out in FC2, and b) workarounds
are documented and linked to in a document I wrote.
More information about the users