kernel compilation voids official RHEL support? - Redhat

This is a discussion on kernel compilation voids official RHEL support? - Redhat ; Hi, Can someone verify the status of one's Red Hat support in the following scenario: If a customer purchases a valid right-to-use license for a RHEL product, then attempts to augment their hardware support by re-compiling the kernel with, for ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: kernel compilation voids official RHEL support?

  1. kernel compilation voids official RHEL support?

    Hi,

    Can someone verify the status of one's Red Hat support in the following
    scenario:

    If a customer purchases a valid right-to-use license for a RHEL
    product, then attempts to augment their hardware support by
    re-compiling the kernel with, for example, the official MPP driver
    published by engenio for use with its storage array products; then is
    it true that this customer can no longer rely on Red Hat for future
    support due to the fact that the kernel has been modified from "factory
    settings"?

    Thanks for the info... I'm very grateful for confirmation or denial of
    this notion. I called a representative at Red Hat (on voice) and she
    clearly told me straight out, "no support". I'm surprised at this new
    awareness of mine... I just hope it is wrong.

    Cheers,
    AZ


  2. Re: kernel compilation voids official RHEL support?

    artie.ziff@gmail.com writes:

    >Hi,


    >Can someone verify the status of one's Red Hat support in the following
    >scenario:


    >If a customer purchases a valid right-to-use license for a RHEL


    That is NOT a right to use license. It is a support contract. You have the
    right to use under the GPL without purchase.

    >product, then attempts to augment their hardware support by
    >re-compiling the kernel with, for example, the official MPP driver
    >published by engenio for use with its storage array products; then is
    >it true that this customer can no longer rely on Red Hat for future
    >support due to the fact that the kernel has been modified from "factory
    >settings"?


    Not sure, but I suspect that it might be. After all if you take your engine
    out of your new car, open it up, change the pistons to increase
    compression, and then have trouble with the engine, would you expect
    support?a But the best people to ask are RedHat.




    >Thanks for the info... I'm very grateful for confirmation or denial of
    >this notion. I called a representative at Red Hat (on voice) and she
    >clearly told me straight out, "no support". I'm surprised at this new
    >awareness of mine... I just hope it is wrong.


    Read that support contract-- it is posted on the web. That takes precedence
    over what she says.

  3. Re: kernel compilation voids official RHEL support?

    artie.ziff@gmail.com wrote:

    > Hi,
    >
    > Can someone verify the status of one's Red Hat support in the
    > following scenario:
    >
    > If a customer purchases a valid right-to-use license for a RHEL
    > product, then attempts to augment their hardware support by
    > re-compiling the kernel with, for example, the official MPP driver
    > published by engenio for use with its storage array products; then is
    > it true that this customer can no longer rely on Red Hat for future
    > support due to the fact that the kernel has been modified from
    > "factory settings"?


    Red Hat will provide support for kernels released by Red Hat and not for
    any kernels modified by a customer, please read;

    https://www.redhat.com/support/servi...as/kernel.html


    --
    "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
    safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- B. Franklin, 1759

  4. Re: kernel compilation voids official RHEL support?

    On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 15:03:32 -0700, artie.ziff wrote:

    > Hi,
    >
    > Can someone verify the status of one's Red Hat support in the following
    > scenario:
    >
    > If a customer purchases a valid right-to-use license for a RHEL
    > product, then attempts to augment their hardware support by
    > re-compiling the kernel with, for example, the official MPP driver
    > published by engenio for use with its storage array products; then is
    > it true that this customer can no longer rely on Red Hat for future
    > support due to the fact that the kernel has been modified from "factory
    > settings"?
    >
    > Thanks for the info... I'm very grateful for confirmation or denial of
    > this notion. I called a representative at Red Hat (on voice) and she
    > clearly told me straight out, "no support". I'm surprised at this new
    > awareness of mine... I just hope it is wrong.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > AZ


    They would have problems if they had to support every possible kernel
    extension. Setting up the update scripts would be a lot more difficult
    for them. So really I can't blame RH for taking that line.

    But, do you ever wonder what you are actually paying for? I like to
    support Linux financially, particularly with company servers, so until
    these support agreements came along I would buy a box set for nearly all
    of those I have set up.

    But my RHES, it is automatically fully up to date through the RH network.
    But actually other than the kernel, it is my least up to date server. FC3
    is much more up to date and still my red dot is flashing at me.

    Just look how far behind your MySQL is, and upgrading that isn't a picnic.
    I had to upgrade mine because I needed to, but for the amount we pay I
    would of expected something on the RH network lists rather than a manual
    job.


  5. Re: kernel compilation voids official RHEL support?

    artie.ziff@gmail.com wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > Can someone verify the status of one's Red Hat support in the following
    > scenario:
    >
    > If a customer purchases a valid right-to-use license for a RHEL
    > product, then attempts to augment their hardware support by
    > re-compiling the kernel with, for example, the official MPP driver
    > published by engenio for use with its storage array products; then is
    > it true that this customer can no longer rely on Red Hat for future
    > support due to the fact that the kernel has been modified from "factory
    > settings"?
    >
    > Thanks for the info... I'm very grateful for confirmation or denial of
    > this notion. I called a representative at Red Hat (on voice) and she
    > clearly told me straight out, "no support". I'm surprised at this new
    > awareness of mine... I just hope it is wrong.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > AZ
    >

    AZ,


    Go for a kernel module that can be imported into the RH supported kernel.


    Regards,


    Jan Gerrit

  6. Re: kernel compilation voids official RHEL support?

    BearItAll wrote:

    > They would have problems if they had to support every possible kernel
    > extension. Setting up the update scripts would be a lot more difficult
    > for them. So really I can't blame RH for taking that line.
    >
    > But, do you ever wonder what you are actually paying for? I like to
    > support Linux financially, particularly with company servers, so until
    > these support agreements came along I would buy a box set for nearly all
    > of those I have set up.
    >
    > But my RHES, it is automatically fully up to date through the RH network.
    > But actually other than the kernel, it is my least up to date server. FC3
    > is much more up to date and still my red dot is flashing at me.


    I wonder why your red dot is flashing at you if you accept the updates. Mine
    lights from time to time, I get the updates, and it changes to blue with a
    steady white checkmark.

    It is tricky to compare Red Hat RPM identification with everyone else's
    because they keep the old numbers and add a lot of suffixes. So a
    2.4.21-32.0.1.ELsmp kernel may (and does) have a lot of 2.6 kernel stuff in
    it. So is it an out of date 2.4 kernel, or a pretty much up to date 2.6 kernel?

    It is true that I dare not update my 1.0.2 Firefox and Thunderbird because
    two of the required libraries are too old. But that is because RHEL3 does
    not come with either, but just Mozilla. And I cannot use Mozilla because my
    stockbroker's web site does not work correctly with it (and enigmail does
    not work with the version supplied by Red Hat).
    >
    > Just look how far behind your MySQL is, and upgrading that isn't a picnic.
    > I had to upgrade mine because I needed to, but for the amount we pay I
    > would of expected something on the RH network lists rather than a manual
    > job.
    >



    --
    .~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
    /V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
    /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
    ^^-^^ 06:45:00 up 62 days, 39 min, 3 users, load average: 4.36, 4.16, 3.72

  7. Re: kernel compilation voids official RHEL support?

    Thank you for the prompt feedback and serious analysis of the scenario.
    I am grateful to you all for sharing your time, observations, and
    insights. Thank you!

    I also appreciated the correction of my erroneous terminology with
    regard to the license/support specifics.

    Cheers,
    AZ


+ Reply to Thread