Re: Which Linux for Oracle 9i on AMD Opteron?

From: Frank van Bortel <fvanbortel_at_netscape.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 13:50:11 +0100
Message-ID: <d04clm$vvb$1@news2.zwoll1.ov.home.nl>

Fabrizio wrote:

> Frank van Bortel wrote:
> 

>>
>> No.
>> Even RH updates the kernel - I would then loose Oracle support?
>> Sounds like you buy a car ("GM advises to use Mobil"), and
>> get refused with the garage because you could only find Shell.
>> [Mobil ceased to exist some time ago in Europe]
>>
>> I find it very strange, if true at all.
>>
>> Just to clarify things; I am not altering source code,
>> I'm merely leaving out, and adding bits to the kernel, I want
>> in there. The "standard" kernel usually is far too big, and carries
>> too much options to my liking.
>> It's a security thing of mine.

> 
> 
> I would agree but it is stated (metalink): even simply recompiling the 
> kernel (even without changing the source code) is not supported.
> 
> Really sad for people like me... :(
> 

Note 68862.1:
"Should you need to change any parameters, you must edit the appropriate header file and rebuild the kernel. "

Absolute nonsense, of course, but the note *does* mention rebuilding the kernel.

Would Metalink leave such a gross error (last revision date: Apr 2004)? (Hm - maybe that's a rhetorical question?!?)

Now, there *is* a list of supported kernel _versions_ in Note:225710.1. This does *not* imply you cannot rebuild your kernel; a mere rebuild will *not* change the version of the core code!

If you have another note specifying a kernel rebuild (make, make bzimage) is a cause to loose support, please post the #

-- 
Thanks & Regards,
Frank van Bortel

Received on Wed Mar 02 2005 - 06:50:11 CST