CentOS - Mar 2006 - Is the unsupported kernel considered stable-ish?

I have a need to use the unsupported kernel for one feature only
(AFP/Appletalk support). Never having had to use it before, I''m unsure
of what''s all in it other than reading it''s config file.

 From those that do use it -- is it considered stable enough to use in
lightweight production? I''m debating the use of it versus wasting my
time rebuilding the normal kernel with AFP enabled. Seeing as how this
is an underpowered machine (Duron 900/512mb), using a prebuilt would be
nice.

-te

ps: why oh why did RH decide to disable this? a simple upgrade of a RH9
machine now turns ugly. :-/ Do they think nobody uses Appletalk anymore?
WTH.

-- 
Troy Engel | Systems Engineer
Fluid, Inc | http://www.fluid.com

On Thu, 2006-03-23 at 12:57 -0800, Troy Engel wrote:
> I have a need to use the unsupported kernel for one feature only
> (AFP/Appletalk support). Never having had to use it before, I''m
unsure
> of what''s all in it other than reading it''s config file.
> 
>  From those that do use it -- is it considered stable enough to use in
> lightweight production? I''m debating the use of it versus wasting
my
> time rebuilding the normal kernel with AFP enabled. Seeing as how this
> is an underpowered machine (Duron 900/512mb), using a prebuilt would be
> nice.
----
presuming you are talking about CentOS-3...yes, install the kernel
unsupported. Not a big deal...upstream didn''t want to support the
modules themselves so they separated them so you knew up front what the
rules were.

You don''t need the appletalk module to do afp over tcp...I tend to use
it on RHEL 3 systems where there''s OS-9 Macintoshes. At home, I am
using
CentOS-4 and upstream never did supply a kernel-unsupported so the
choices there are either to use centos-plus kernel or to build the
module yourself (not too hard)
----
> 
> -te
> 
> ps: why oh why did RH decide to disable this? a simple upgrade of a RH9
> machine now turns ugly. :-/ Do they think nobody uses Appletalk anymore?
> WTH.
----
OS 9 is pretty much dead. You shouldn''t need the appletalk kernel
module
with OS X systems.

as for turning an upgrade ugly...I think you are making a mountain out
of a molehill...if that''s all you got to bitch about - you should be
very happy when you see how easy it is...

CentOS-3
yum install kernel-unsupported     # Uni-processor
yum install kernel-smp-unsupported # SMP

CentOS-4 # something like this should work
yum enablerepo=centosplus install \
kernel-2.6.9-34.106.unsupported.i686

I actually considered not responding because of the whining tone of your
email. I hope that you are downloading the 2.0.3 netatalk source and
compiling it yourself.

Craig

Craig White wrote:
> ----
> OS 9 is pretty much dead. You shouldn''t need the appletalk kernel
module
> with OS X systems.
You presuppose that OS9 is dead -- maybe for you. We run a mixed 
environment where some things work in 9, some in X. And even with X, 
some things need AFP not SMB. What I should and shouldn''t need
isn''t of
concern in my post -- I asked about the contents of the unsupported 
kernel. You''re out in left field with your opinions.
> as for turning an upgrade ugly...I think you are making a mountain out
> of a molehill...if that''s all you got to bitch about - you should
be
> very happy when you see how easy it is...
You completely misunderstand the question -- trust me, I know how to 
install a kernel. :) The question is what *other* things are in 
unsupported, and are they stable. Sure, I can install the kernel -- but 
what happens to... I dunno, my 2940U2W card using the aic7xxx module. 
Does unsupported enable risky code?

I''ve been unable to find a doc that indicates a comparison of normal to
unsupported. Hence, I cannot tell if using it will effect normal 
operation for anything else. Know of such a doc?
> I actually considered not responding because of the whining tone of your
> email. I hope that you are downloading the 2.0.3 netatalk source and
> compiling it yourself.
I have been building public custom RPMS for it for over 5 years, thank 
you (feel free to Google). My need is 1.6.4a to maintain a CNID scheme 
with other servers, there is more than one Appletalk server onsite.

Thanks for your holier-than-thou attitude, I love it! Keep ''em coming, 
maybe I can return the favour some day.

-te

-- 
Troy Engel | Systems Engineer
Fluid Inc. | http://www.fluid.com