Bug 506905 - LTC 49790: Sync up SCSI DH code with mainline changes [rhel-5.3.z]
Summary: LTC 49790: Sync up SCSI DH code with mainline changes [rhel-5.3.z]
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5
Classification: Red Hat
Component: kernel
Version: 5.3
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
urgent
urgent
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Jiri Pirko
QA Contact: Red Hat Kernel QE team
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 489582
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2009-06-19 08:39 UTC by RHEL Program Management
Modified: 2015-05-05 01:17 UTC (History)
19 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2009-09-29 16:10:23 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata RHSA-2009:1466 0 normal SHIPPED_LIVE Important: kernel security and bug fix update 2009-09-29 16:10:13 UTC

Description RHEL Program Management 2009-06-19 08:39:58 UTC
This bug has been copied from bug #489582 and has been proposed
to be backported to 5.3 z-stream (EUS).

Comment 3 Jesse Larrew 2009-06-19 15:48:43 UTC
IBM, please add business justification to go along with the request for the
next 5.3.z. Thanks!

Comment 4 Jiri Pirko 2009-06-22 11:11:45 UTC
Jasse, please tell us which patches for this bz do we need for 5.3.z? I see 10 patches for 506905 (5.4 bz) in 5.4 tree. Or is there a need to make 5.3.z-specific patch?

Thanks.

Comment 8 Jiri Pirko 2009-09-16 07:31:16 UTC
in kernel-2.6.18-128.8.1.el5

Comment 10 Chandra Seetharaman 2009-09-22 16:08:41 UTC
Hi Jiri,

Can you please give me the errata #, and when it is expected to be released.

Thanks

Comment 11 Jiri Skrabal 2009-09-23 12:44:20 UTC
Hi Chandra,

errata # is RHSA-2009:8875 and current plan is to release that September 29. Right now everything looks good, so we should meet this date.

Comment 13 Zhang Kexin 2009-09-28 15:50:10 UTC
Hi Chandra,

have you test this kernel? If yes, is result good? If not tested, could you please test it? thanks a lot.

Comment 14 Chandra Seetharaman 2009-09-29 02:11:39 UTC
Isn't the errata getting released only tomorrow ? (Sep 29 ?)

Is there a link where I can download it from ? Can you give me a pointer for the source.

Comment 18 errata-xmlrpc 2009-09-29 16:10:23 UTC
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2009-1466.html

Comment 19 Chandra Seetharaman 2009-10-01 02:01:38 UTC
Downloaded the source and ppc64 kernel from the links in comment #16 and verified that all the required patches are in the sources and the kernel behaves as expected.

Comment 20 Chandra Seetharaman 2009-10-01 02:04:48 UTC
Hi,

I just logged into https://rhn.redhat.com and looked under erratas, I fid not find the errata referred in comment #11.

I even tried to search for the given errata # and it didn't find any errata.

Am I looking at the wrong place ?

Comment 21 Chandra Seetharaman 2009-10-07 22:31:51 UTC
I do not see the errata RHSA-2009-1466 at https://rhn.redhat.com/rhn/errata/Overview.do.

I see few numbers before and numbers after 1466.

Is there a delay ? 

When I go to the URL in comment #18, I do not see the packages.

Please help.

Comment 22 Zhang Kexin 2009-10-08 01:52:05 UTC
Hi Chandra,

Very sorry for the late, I'm having holiday in the past 7 days.

to comment #20, errata number has been changed from RHSA-2009:8875 to RHSA-2009:1466.

to comment #21, I saw there are RHSA-2009-1466 at https://rhn.redhat.com/rhn/errata/Overview.do .
And also there are packages in the URL in comment #18.

please try again. if still can't find it, please let me know.

Comment 23 Chris Ward 2009-10-12 15:17:31 UTC
This errata should be available via RHN. I have also checked and found it using the simple search tool at the top of the page. I selected "Errata" and used 1466 as the search keywords.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.