Welcome To ArkSales! Who's Ready For Ark Ascended?!?! We Will Be Selling On The New Unreal Engine Ark As Soon As We Can! Get 30% OffAny Order, Use Code"DinoDaddy" 50% OffYour Entire Order When You Use Code "BigDino" For Order Totals Over$100! Refer A Friend, Get a Free Giga! Grab Some ArkSales Merch And You Get A Free Top Giga!
When you and your colleagues paid for red hat enterprise Linux and received the media that held the binaries, originally, somewhere in the bowels or on some server somewhere, is that not true? Did redhat also send the source code that same media? Yes? The source and everything else? … That is correct. So why can’t anyone download the kernel from the red hat website? Is it because they don’t give you access to that same media? I can’t imagine that red hat’s managers would agree (if they were acting with integrity) to give you that media to start with…what do you think?– Tahming Yeh (subscriber, #37953)
I’d like to add that just opening the folder that contains the kernel source, and running make (or update “the other way around”) in the source assumes that the tree constructed by the kernel tree builders from the kernel-source-2.6.32.tar.bz2 is already up to the date in your repository and does then nothing. (Notice: NOT, I would argue, any fault of Red Hat. This is just how things work). If the source is not up to date, the kernel-source-2.6.32.tar.bz2 would have failed to build and you would get an error message you would normally be able to read. And then you could find the identifier of the file whose few patch requires applying if you so wished. As it is now, you can never tell you object a -71.14.1.el6. Your editor is presuming, by commenting out all of these identifications, that this only a portion of the repository needs to be checked for applying to a specific architecture in this case, which is how things work. Is that not correct? (Log in to post comments) Finally, you put that repo undercontribution with the contributing reference. – Tahming Yeh (subscriber, #37953)
This is a very, very bad idea if you want to properly document your code. Apatch provided by a third party developer is not necessarily your thing. Itis a patch from a different party, who may not feel obligated to providethat patch to you if you ask him. He may offer you a patch instead. Andthen it gets integrated into the core linux kernel, and you go along yourhappy way. d2c66b5586