Fedora updated to Fedora Core 2 (FC2)

September 14, 2004 4:46 am

I’ve updated the Fedora distro for Fedora Core 2. The minimum size increased a little bit to 630MB. If you plan on using this with a 2.6 kernel, make sure to “mv /lib/tls /lib/tls-disabled” until UML fully supports NPTL.

[img]http://fedora.redhat.com/images/header-fedora_logo.png[/img]

-Chris

7 Responses

  1. I believe you should also move /usr/lib/tls to /usr/lib/tls-disabled.
    I didn’t do that previously and my BIND keeps dying.

  2. [quote:871a43d58e=”fajar”]I believe you should also move /usr/lib/tls to /usr/lib/tls-disabled.
    I didn’t do that previously and my BIND keeps dying.[/quote]
    And moving /lib/tls fixes that problem?

  3. [quote:c33378914c=”caker”]I’ve updated the Fedora distro for Fedora Core 2. The minimum size increased a little bit to 630MB. If you plan on using this with a 2.6 kernel, make sure to “mv /lib/tls /lib/tls-disabled” until UML fully supports NPTL.

    [img]http://fedora.redhat.com/images/header-fedora_logo.png[/img]

    -Chris[/quote]

    You can also downgrade your glibc-*.i686.rpm to glibc-*.i386.rpm. This has had no ill effects for me and I don’t have to worry about yum upgrading glibc and replacing the /lib/tls directory.

    If you are going to try FC3 (test) this will not work since the i386 rpm seems to contain the tls libraries.

  4. [quote:4b8769ef90=”caker”]And moving /lib/tls fixes that problem?[/quote]
    /lib/tls and /usr/lib/tls.
    MySQL seems OK with just /lib/tls moved, but BIND still keeps dying at random times until I also moved /usr/lib/tls

  5. [quote:733db60b54=”caker”]I’ve updated the Fedora distro for Fedora Core 2. The minimum size increased a little bit to 630MB. If you plan on using this with a 2.6 kernel, make sure to “mv /lib/tls /lib/tls-disabled” until UML fully supports NPTL.[/quote]
    You’ve <i>removed</i> FC1 from the list of choices? Hmm. So I can no longer rebuild my linode back to how it was, if I needed to? You have RH8 and 9, and Slackware 9 and 10, would it be possible to have FC1 and FC2 ?

  6. I’m not really a fan of FC/Redhat but it seems logitcal to supply FC1 as well as FC2 if your supplying old RH versions.

  7. [quote:b90fb03bdb=”noderat”]I’m not really a fan of FC/Redhat but it seems logitcal to supply FC1 as well as FC2 if your supplying old RH versions.[/quote]
    Done!

    -Chris

Leave a Reply