SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

March 2011

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Date:
Sat, 5 Mar 2011 08:10:01 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (15 lines)
On Fri, 04 Mar 2011 22:07:55 -0400
Herb Thompson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Just curious.  Does this change in the way Red Hat "publishes" kernel 
> patches have any adverse consequences for SL?
> 
> http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2011/03/04/red_hat_twarts_oracle_and_novell_with_change_to_source_code_packaging/


No.  It's only relevant if you have to patch the RHEL kernel sources,
like Oracle does.  Scientific Linux (and standard CentOS) kernels are
not modified, as patched kernels could (at least in theory) result in
less than complete compatibility.  There was a little discussion
already, in the SL6 release announcement thread.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2