On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 02:27:15 -0700, Brian Richardson <brian@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Wong Kwok-hon wrote:
Which one is the right way ? Would it become rpm? And how about to become a rpm ? How to remove the error kernel if failed ?
If you can't answer these questions yourself, you don't need to compile the kernel. Redhat doesn't provide support for custom-compiled kernels.
So what would you recommend he, and basically, I, do? I don't entirely understand the kernel and am having problems with the latest kernel. Still, f I do not recompile I will not be able to move on from the outdated kernel I am using. Heck, from what I understand, if I do not recompile the kernel, I won't be able to move from FC2 to FC3 as there are changes that conflict with my box.
I have the same questions as he did and without recompiling the kernel I have no idea how to proceed.
There are two aspects about recompiling the kernel. One is the "mechanical" procedure for actual getting the sources (e.g. download the SRPM for an "official" kernel that is close to what you want), making the edits and building/installing the kernel. I would always advocate creating a kernel RPM as this makes it easier to install/rebuild/uninstall later. A useful tutorial can be found at:
http://crab-lab.zool.ohiou.edu/kevin/kernel-compilation-tutorial-en/
The other aspect is to actually know what configuration changes/patchs you need to apply in order to fix the problem you are having with the "stock" kernel. This is a much harder problem (if not impossible) to give a generic answer to.
Paul.
