#$!@

[Richard Hubbard]

1. do you have a burn of fc3? (i know for a fact that
the kernel source and the kernel installed with fc3
are in agreement)
2. are you available on saturday?
3. which 802.11G card should I bring?

--- Cyber Source <peter at thecybersource.com> wrote:

> I would like to have a crack at that laptop here,
> can you bring it by 
> our shop? If we get that going maybe you can give
> Jesse some extra 
> credit in his Linux class, lol, jk. Not like he
> needs it from what I 
> hear.....(proud Dad speakin..)
> 
> Richard Hubbard wrote:
> 
> >That is the problem.  I never expected different
> >kernel versions to work together.
> >what i expected is that if redhat issues a major
> >release and calls it FEDORA CORE 4, then the kernel
> >sources labeled as FC4 should match with the
> binaries
> >released as FC4.
> >
> >What I don't expect is a major release called
> Fedora
> >Core 4, and the kernel sources to be whatever the
> hell
> >version we want to pump out this week and call FC4,
> >even though we are several release numbers away
> from
> >what we released when we pumped out FC4.
> >
> >When redhat released all of their prior Fedora Core
> >releases, only ONE kernel version was labeled as
> FC#.
> >All of the others were given different numbers, but
> >none were labeled as the 'official' fedora core
> >version. This way, most intelligent people would be
> >able to tell which kernel source rpm went with with
> >kernel at a glance.
> >
> >With FC4, I have now stumbled over three different
> >releases, all called FC4.  My error was assuming
> that
> >redhat would stay consistant with their naming
> >conventions.  
> >
> >I also expected that when I did a yum install
> >kernel-devel, I would get the kernel number that I
> am
> >currently running.
> >
> >wrong again.
> >
> >I really don't want to have to recompile a kernel,
> >just so I can get some !!@#$$%@#$%@#$&^#$%^#&
> wireless
> >network card to run, simply because redhat refuses
> to
> >supply the source code for the kernel that they
> >shipped with a MAJOR RELEASE of their software.
> (I'm
> >not running FC4test#, this is the 'gold' release.) 
> >
> >
> >--- "David W. Aquilina" <david at starkindler.us>
> wrote:
> >
> >  
> >
> >>Slow down there. The problem you experienced is
> not
> >>specific to Red Hat / Fedora. Anything in this
> >>wonderful world of Linux related to the kernel
> >>itself is going to be very specific and not
> tolerant
> >>of any errors whatsoever. Kernel versions and
> >>variants always must match exactly, and you'd have
> >>this problem were you attempting to install the
> >>kernel-devel package, the GFS packages, or a
> >>commercial product such as EMC PowerPath. The
> >>Uniprocessor kernel and SMP kernel, for these
> types
> >>of situations, are entirely different kernels. You
> >>wouldn't expect a patch written against a 2.4
> kernel
> >>to work as is against a 2.6 kernel, would you? 
> >>
> >>
> >>-- 
> >>David W. Aquilina
> >>david at starkindler.us
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >	
> >		
>
>______________________________________________________
> >Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina
> relief effort.
> >http://store.yahoo.com/redcross-donate3/
> >
> >  
> >
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com