Umm... SATA support has been available in 2.4 since around 2.4.13.
I'm sure someone has a kernel RPM available for 2.4.31 (the latest)
in RH9 somewhere.
-Blake
On Mar 3, 2006, at 9:39 AM, Michael Halcrow wrote:
On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 06:40:08AM -0700, Stuart Jansen wrote:
Don't user RH9. Just don't. It doesn't support SATA. It doesn't
support all kinds of modern hardware. It doesn't get bug fixes. It
doesn't get security updates. Would you use Windows 98? Of course
not! So why use RH9?
This is probably for work. Tell your bosses they're being too
cheap. If a vendor only supports RH9, drop kick the vendor.
I can think of several legitimate reasons why a client might want to
stick with an older version of a distribution. Some involve custom
apps built for a specific environment, certification (i.e., CAPP/EAL4)
and contract requirements, overhead involved in migration to new
versions (especially when the machines are not connected to an
external network), and so forth.
A co-worker of mine still runs the 2.4 kernel on his MythTV (v. 0.16)
Slackware box, simply because the thing ``just works.'' He is more
likely to patch his kernel for SATA support than try to hoist his
kernel to the 2.6 branch; it would simply save him time and effort.
Mike
.___________________________________________________________________.
Michael A. Halcrow
Security Software Engineer, IBM Linux Technology Center
GnuPG Fingerprint: 419C 5B1E 948A FA73 A54C 20F5 DB40 8531 6DCA 8769
"We live, thank God, in a secular society."
- Joseph Campbell
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
