CentOS - Sep 2008 - Run a more recent kernel than 2.6.18 on CentOS?

Hi,

Usually I'm not one to complain about "old" version of the CentOS
kernel
and/or software, since I appreciate CentOS' stability. So this might be 
the exception that confirms the rule. I've been jumping through several 
burning loops these past days to configure my little MSI Wind netbook, 
and I'm currently considering going for a more recent kernel. There's no
way the Ralink driver for the wireless card will build on an older 
kernel than 2.6.22, apparently.

I'm prepared to do some tinkering, but in the meanwhile, can you give 
some basic recommendations or caveats? This is not our production 
database server, so it's not a big deal if it's a little bit less
stable.

What i naively plan to do: get a kernel SRPM from Fedora 9, try to build 
from there, and see where it leads. I think I'm going to give it a shot 
in VirtualBox first. But then, maybe one of you has already gone that 
path and can tell me if I have to expect something trivial or an 
experience of the hair-pulling type.

Cheers,

Niki

PS: with similar requests, folks usually suggest I run Fedora. So let me 
state: I like CentOS. I don't want to run Fedora.

Niki Kovacs wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Usually I'm not one to complain about "old" version of the
CentOS kernel
> and/or software, since I appreciate CentOS' stability. So this might be
> the exception that confirms the rule.
It's not the end of the world. I've a server with a whole bunch of 
various services, running CentOS 5.2 x86_64 and a custom kernel, because 
the network card is not supported by the original kernel. It's rock solid.
> What i naively plan to do: get a kernel SRPM from Fedora 9, try to build 
> from there, and see where it leads.
Nah.
Get the vanilla kernel tarball.
Apply the mkspec patch. (*)
Get the .config file from the CentOS kernel (see /boot).
Use that config file to do a "make oldconfig" in the vanilla kernel 
source tree. This will import most settings from the original CentOS kernel.
Now do a "make menuconfig" and peruse the config items. Make sure
it's
not missing important stuff.
Now do "make rpm".
Voila, you've got a kernel rpm that's pretty similar to CentOS, only
newer.

(*) - without the mkspec patch, the rpm will be pretty generic. The 
CentOS/Redhat kernel rpm has a few more features that you need. This 
patch adds them. See the file attached to this message.

-- 
Florin Andrei

http://florin.myip.org/
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: mkspec.patch
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080917/1f3edafd/attachment-0001.ksh>

Florin Andrei wrote:
> Get the vanilla kernel tarball.
> Apply the mkspec patch. (*)
Now do this:

export RPM_RH5_STYLE=1

Otherwise the patch is pointless.

Or hack the patch and remove the "if $RPM_RH5_STYLE; then"
conditionals
so it's always generated "RH5 style".
> Get the .config file from the CentOS kernel (see /boot).
> Use that config file to do a "make oldconfig" in the vanilla
kernel
> source tree. This will import most settings from the original CentOS 
> kernel.
> Now do a "make menuconfig" and peruse the config items. Make sure
it's
> not missing important stuff.
> Now do "make rpm".
> Voila, you've got a kernel rpm that's pretty similar to CentOS,
only newer.
> 
> (*) - without the mkspec patch, the rpm will be pretty generic. The 
> CentOS/Redhat kernel rpm has a few more features that you need. This 
> patch adds them. See the file attached to this message.
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

-- 
Florin Andrei

http://florin.myip.org/

On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Niki Kovacs <contact at kikinovak.net>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Usually I'm not one to complain about "old" version of the
CentOS kernel
> and/or software, since I appreciate CentOS' stability. So this might be
the
> exception that confirms the rule. I've been jumping through several
burning
> loops these past days to configure my little MSI Wind netbook, and I'm
> currently considering going for a more recent kernel. There's no way
the
> Ralink driver for the wireless card will build on an older kernel than
> 2.6.22, apparently.
>
(snip)
> I'm prepared to do some tinkering, but in the meanwhile, can you give
some
> basic recommendations or caveats? This is not our production database
> server, so it's not a big deal if it's a little bit less stable.
> Niki
>
> PS: with similar requests, folks usually suggest I run Fedora. So let me
> state: I like CentOS. I don't want to run Fedora.
There is a CentOS kernel 2.6.24 for testing purposes built by Johnny
Hughes.  Take a look at this forum thread for details:

http://www.centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=11583&forum=45&post_id=54048#forumpost54048

Akemi / toracat

Akemi Yagi wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Niki Kovacs <contact at
kikinovak.net> wrote:
>   
>> Hi,
>>
>> Usually I'm not one to complain about "old" version of
the CentOS kernel
>> and/or software, since I appreciate CentOS' stability. So this
might be the
>> exception that confirms the rule. I've been jumping through several
burning
>> loops these past days to configure my little MSI Wind netbook, and
I'm
>> currently considering going for a more recent kernel. There's no
way the
>> Ralink driver for the wireless card will build on an older kernel than
>> 2.6.22, apparently.
>>
>>     
> (snip)
>   
>> I'm prepared to do some tinkering, but in the meanwhile, can you
give some
>> basic recommendations or caveats? This is not our production database
>> server, so it's not a big deal if it's a little bit less
stable.
>>     
>
>   
>> Niki
>>
>> PS: with similar requests, folks usually suggest I run Fedora. So let
me
>> state: I like CentOS. I don't want to run Fedora.
>>     
>
> There is a CentOS kernel 2.6.24 for testing purposes built by Johnny
> Hughes.  Take a look at this forum thread for details:
>
>
http://www.centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=11583&forum=45&post_id=54048#forumpost54048
Oh, why couldn't it be 2.6.27. Then I would have the patch I need?

But then, reading up on this kernel, my other drivers like dkms probably 
won't work.....