Kernel Security update

[Jeremy Fowler]

I don't know, I like RPM and I think its a great concept. However you do have to
live with the packager's configuration which is usually lowest common
denominator. I like to build my own RPMs which really isn't all to difficult.
It's the easiest way I know to keep programs updated while keeping your RPM
database up to date and *accurate* and other RPM programs happy. Just tailor
your own spec file or edit someone else's, add patches to your source, and
adjust your configuration to suit your needs. Then it's as simple as rpm -ba
<name>.spec to build the new RPM. Now you have the best of both worlds, an RPM
package customized for your needs. However, kernel RPM packaging can be a wee
bit more complex and is not for the faint of heart. ;-P

A tip on building RPMS, use separate directories for each package and then
soft-link each of the RPM directories in /usr/src/redhat to that package's
directory. It's a lot easier to manage different package's SOURCE files if they
are kept in separate locations.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: JD Runyan [mailto:Jason.Runyan at nitckc.usda.gov]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 12:06 PM
> To: kclug at kclug.org
> Subject: Re: Kernel Security update
>
>
> I have been trying to use RPMs for everything on my workstations, in an
> effort to see if it is feasable to put linux on the desktop for the
> layman.  So far so good.  That would include the kernel.  I would say
> that anyone using RPMs for thier servers are asking for trouble down the
> road.
>
> On Wed, Nov ,  at 11:37:48AM -0600, Richard Edelman wrote:
> > Yeah, you can just use rpms to upgrade your kernel (ick). I don't
> like it; I
> > prefer tailoring my kernel to do just what I need. But if you're in a bind,
> > too lazy, or just don't think you'd notice any performance gain, upgrading
> > your kernel via rpm is a lot quicker and easier.
> >
> > Rich
> >
> > On Wednesday 14 November 2001 10:55 am, Brian Densmore wrote:
> > > Yes, that's the one. It was kernel 2.2.19. I didn't notice the through
> > > kernel 2.4.10 part though. Hmm, I use 2.4.3, better check on that and
> > > upgrade if necessary. They have an RPM for the kernel upgrade! I've
> > > never seen that before!? Is it possible to upgrade the kernel without
> > > recompiling now?
> > > If so, all I can say is ... Whoo-hoo!
> > >
>
> --
> JD Runyan
> 		"You can't milk a point."
> 			David M. Kuehn, Ph.D.
>
>