On Wed, 16 Mar 2005, Connie Sieh wrote:
> I have uploaded to
>
> ftp://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/30rolling/i386/contrib/RPMS/nfs/
>
> kernel-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.athlon.rpm
> kernel-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.i686.rpm
> kernel-hugemem-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.i686.rpm
> kernel-hugemem-unsupported-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.i686.rpm
> kernel-module-openafs-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR-1.2.11-15.12.SL.athlon.rpm
> kernel-module-openafs-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR-1.2.11-15.12.SL.i686.rpm
> kernel-module-openafs-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDRsmp-1.2.11-15.12.SL.athlon.rpm
> kernel-module-openafs-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDRsmp-1.2.11-15.12.SL.i686.rpm
> kernel-smp-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.athlon.rpm
> kernel-smp-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.i686.rpm
> kernel-smp-unsupported-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.athlon.rpm
> kernel-smp-unsupported-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.i686.rpm
> kernel-unsupported-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.athlon.rpm
> kernel-unsupported-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.i686.rpm
> README.nfs
>
> And the src.rpm to
>
> ftp://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/30rolling/i386/contrib/SRPMS/nfs/
>
> kernel-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.src.rpm
>
> Will those who have had this please test these. Once I get positive
> feedback I will move to the 302/303/304 contrib areas.
>
> x86_64 version to be uploaded soon.
I have now uploaded the x86_64 version to
From [log in to unmask] Wed Mar 16 16:37:34 2005
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 16:28:08 -0600
From: root <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: CONTRIB for SL 30rolling x86_64 now available
The following CONTRIB for SL 30rolling x86_64 are now available from:
ftp://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/30rolling/x86_64/contrib/
./RPMS/nfs/kernel-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.ia32e.rpm
./RPMS/nfs/kernel-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.x86_64.rpm
./RPMS/nfs/kernel-doc-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.x86_64.rpm
./RPMS/nfs/kernel-module-openafs-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR-1.2.11-15.12.SL.x86_64.rpm
./RPMS/nfs/kernel-module-openafs-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDRsmp-1.2.11-15.12.SL.x86_64.rpm
./RPMS/nfs/kernel-smp-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.x86_64.rpm
./RPMS/nfs/kernel-smp-unsupported-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.x86_64.rpm
./RPMS/nfs/kernel-source-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.x86_64.rpm
./RPMS/nfs/kernel-unsupported-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.ia32e.rpm
./RPMS/nfs/kernel-unsupported-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.x86_64.rpm
./RPMS/nfs/README.nfs
./SRPMS/nfs/kernel-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR.src.rpm
./SRPMS/nfs/kernel-module-openafs-2.4.21-27.0.2.ELSDR-1.2.11-15.12.SL.src.rpm
-Connie Sieh
>
> -Connie Sieh
>
> On
> Wed, 16 Mar 2005, Stephen J. Gowdy wrote:
>
> > Hi Connie,
> > Great, thanks. I hope that will be what is needed.
> > Yeah, Update 5 is meant to have the fix. It looks like (if you
> > read the bugzilla link) they changed their mind about how to fix it
> > between the kernel SLAC has and what will be in Update 5. Lets hope it is
> > just as good (although it sounds more like what was done for the
> > 2.4.21-27.0.2ELSDR kernel).
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Stephen.
> >
> > On Wed, 16 Mar 2005, Connie Sieh wrote:
> >
> > > Stephen,
> > >
> > > On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, Stephen J. Gowdy wrote:
> > >
> > > > [for folk on sbplan-l that might want to respond the SL-users list only
> > > > accepts postings from subscribers according to their web page]
> > > >
> > > > Hi All,
> > > > I understand that RAL has rebuilt the RHEL3 kernel
> > > > 2.4.21-27.0.2.EL to back out a patch from RH which introduced a NFS kernel
> > > > hang (see [1]). For BaBar this problem is causing significant problems on
> > > > our interactive machines at SLAC. SLAC Computing Services are currently
> > > > requiring kernels run on SL machines come from the official SL
> > > > distribution. For their RHEL3 machines they have a hot fix kernel from RH
> > > > (named 2.4.21-27.8.EL) under their support agreement (which includes much
> > > > more than just reversing the bad patch RH introduced) so all the RHEL3
> > > > machines at SLAC don't have a problem.
> > > > I have personal misgiving about SL actually shipping kernels that
> > > > are not just a rebuild of the RHEL kernels but this problem is interfering
> > > > with physics productivity and a solution of some kind must be found. I
> > > > also understand that RAL passed the changes along last week to the SL
> > > > maintainers (I think they called it 2.4.21-27.0.2ELSDR). So my questions
> > > > are;
> > > >
> > > > 1. Will this kernel will be released officially from Scientific Linux?
> > >
> > > It will be released as a /contrib entry. This allows those that have the
> > > issue to have a kernel with a solution and those who do not have the
> > > problem to use the standard Upstream Vendor rebuilt kernel.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > 2. If so, when?
> > >
> > > I rebuilt it last week. Got busy getting x86_64 out and Troy was out of
> > > town last week so did not get it out last week as hoped. Easily by end of
> > > this week, most likely sooner.
> > >
> > > I believe it is true that the Update 5 kernel is to have this bug fixed.
> > > Is this true?
> > >
> > > -Connie Sieh
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I would be very grateful for fast and frank feedback.
> > > >
> > > > regards,
> > > >
> > > > Stephen.
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=138182
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > /------------------------------------+-------------------------\
> > > > |Stephen J. Gowdy | SLAC, MailStop 34, |
> > > > |http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~gowdy/ | 2575 Sand Hill Road, |
> > > > |http://calendar.yahoo.com/gowdy | Menlo Park CA 94025, USA |
> > > > |EMail: [log in to unmask] | Tel: +1 650 926 3144 |
> > > > \------------------------------------+-------------------------/
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > /------------------------------------+-------------------------\
> > |Stephen J. Gowdy | SLAC, MailStop 34, |
> > |http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~gowdy/ | 2575 Sand Hill Road, |
> > |http://calendar.yahoo.com/gowdy | Menlo Park CA 94025, USA |
> > |EMail: [log in to unmask] | Tel: +1 650 926 3144 |
> > \------------------------------------+-------------------------/
> >
>
|
