Troy Dawson wrote: > OK, this will just drive me nuts if I don't fix it. > Fixing > I am putting xfs-filesystem along with the kernel-modules into i386. > I am also changing the comps file so that if someone picks xfs, it > will automatically pull in xfs-filesystem, just like on SL 5.3. I think this is a good decision! to avoid some frustrated users. Cheers, Urs > Troy > > Troy J Dawson wrote: >> Hi Urs, >> You are correct, and this is something I didn't notice. My desktop >> is a 64 bit machine, I saw XFS as a kernel module, and I assumed that >> it was a kernel module in 32 bit as well. >> >> We have always been telling people to only put XFS on 64 bit >> machines, but it looks like RedHat is doing more than just telling >> people. >> >> So the question is, what do we do? >> For security updates, I guess we have to provide i386 kernel module >> rpm's still. >> >> For the SL 5.4 release ... well ... you can't actually do anything >> during the install with xfs. So, is it that bad that the kernel >> module isn't in there? >> >> But part of me wonders if it isn't better to just put the needed >> stuff in, rebuild everything, retest, and get it out. It isn't that >> dramatic of a change, and if this was monday, I wouldn't even think >> about it. >> But part of me knows the dangers of XFS on 32 bit to begin with ... >> so I'm a bit torn. >> >> Troy >> >> Urs Beyerle wrote: >>> Hi Troy and Connie, >>> >>> I'm a little bit confused about xfs support. >>> (Sorry, but I have no time to check it myself.) >>> >>> Did we have kernel-module-xfs for i368 in SL5.3.? I think yes. >>> Now in SL5.4 xfs module is in the x86_64 kernel, but not in the i368 >>> kernel, right? >>> If this is true, it will make xfs formated partition unusable after an >>> update to SL5.4 (for i386)...? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Urs >>> >>> >>> >>> Troy Dawson wrote: >>>> Release Candidate 2.5 for Scientific Linux 5.4 has been released >>>> for both i386 and x86_64. >>>> >>>> This is essentially the release. All the release notes say it is the >>>> release, everything is in the correct place, and we don't plan on >>>> changing anything unless there is a real show stopper. >>>> >>>> So this is your final chance to test. If there isn't a real show >>>> stopper, then tomorrow we will change the 5x link to point to this, >>>> and we will officially announce the release of Scientific Linux 5.4 >>>> >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> >>>> DOWNLOAD INFO >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> http://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/5rolling/i386 >>>> http://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/5rolling/x86_64 >>>> http://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/5rolling/iso >>>> or >>>> http://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/54/i386 >>>> http://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/54/x86_64 >>>> http://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/54/iso >>>> >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> >>>> CHANGES by Scientific Linux >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ** Added all the latest errata and fastbugs >>>> >>>> ** Verified signatures of rpm's >>>> ** (Note: jdk x86_64 is a known exception) >>>> >>>> ** Verified rpm versions, releases, and names, fixing those that were >>>> not correct >>>> >>>> ** CD and DVD install boot screen now says what version and arch you >>>> are installing >>>> >>>> ** General Cleanup of release notes, readme files and other minor >>>> stuff that doesn't really affect the release, but makes things look >>>> better. >> >> > >