[Triumf-linux-managers] TRIUMF customizations to Scientific Linux distributions

[Kelvin Raywood]

We (Core Computing and Network) are interested in using some SBCs for 
various purposes so would be interested in talking to you about what 
you've done.  There's also a recent thread on the SL mailing list with 
results summarised at http://wiki.keithl.com/index.cgi?SL5Alix

Re JFS in the kernel, Brian Leathem of MIS recently set up a 
virtual-machine running SL5 with a JFS partition.  He needed 
case-insensitive file-system under Linux and JFS provides this.

To get a jfs-enabled kernel, he used the CentOSplus [1] kernel which is 
compatible with SL.  CentOSplus also has the jfs utilities rpm. You can 
get the centosplus kernels and jfsutils rpms from

http://mirror.triumf.ca/centos/5/centosplus/i386/RPMS/

If you want, I can post a yum repo file that is appropriate for centosplus .

Kel Raywood
TRIUMF Core Computing and Networking

[1] For a description of CentOSplus see 
http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories?action=show&redirect=Repositories


Rod Nussbaumer wrote:
> Recently, I've been working on cross-development of Linux applications 
> for an ARM CPU based single board computer. The target SBC uses a SD 
> flash memory for storage and as a boot media. To prevent wear and tear 
> from write cycles, the SD flash memory uses a wear-leveling filesystem, 
> JFS. To install software on the target, it is useful to be able to copy 
> object code and other files to the SD card using a card reader attached 
> to the development host. However, Scientific Linux is distributed 
> without JFS support in the kernel.
> In order to build it in, I have built a new kernel on my development 
> host. In order for others to do such development work, that effort will 
> have to be duplicated on all hosts that developers in the ISAC Controls 
> group uses. If the TRIUMF-supported SL distribution could be 
> built/modified to include the JFS support, it would be a considerable 
> reduction in effort. Would it be deemed feasible to get a JFS-enabled 
> kernel built into the local distribution?
> There were some unexpected obstacles associated with building the kernel 
> that I used (2.6.10). It would seem better to use the standard 
> version(s) that SL provides, but I didn't have the patience to go 
> through the Redhat way of building kernels from sources. They seem to 
> discourage that, from what I read.
> 
> Rod Nussbaumer,
> ISAC Controls