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

From: Frank van Bortel <fvanbortel_at_netscape.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 17:51:27 +0100
Message-ID: <d04qq2$sp$1@news4.zwoll1.ov.home.nl>

Fabrizio wrote:
> Frank van Bortel wrote:
>

>> 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 #

>
>
> #228070.1, #228374.1
>
> Quoting:
> "Modification of kernel parameters is supported, but recompiling the
> kernel, with or without source modifications, is not. "
>
> But I would be glad to read something official stating the contrary.
> I often prefer to rebuild kernels to make them "minimal".
>
> Regards
>

So do I.

Note 228070.1 seems some trap door out for support: it is not supported to load unsupported kernel modules.

Anyway - from now on, I will just relink the kernel ;) And thanks for pointing it out, although I still do not agree, and doubt if it will stand for a court.

-- 
Regards,
Frank van Bortel

Received on Wed Mar 02 2005 - 10:51:27 CST