|
Quoting Bjoern Metzdorf <bm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> To build the ipvs within the kernel, you need do the following commands:
> cd /usr/src/linux
> cat <path-name>/linux_kernel_ksyms_c.diff | patch -p1
> cat <path-name>/linux_net_netsyms_c.diff | patch -p1
> cat <path-name>/linux_net_Makefile.diff | patch -p1
> cat <path-name>/linux_net_ipv4_Config_in.diff | patch -p1
> cat <path-name>/linux_ip_fw_compat_c.diff | patch -p1
> cp -rp <path-name>/ipvs net/ipv4
> mv net/ipv4/ipvs/linux_net_ipv4_ipvs_Makefile
> net/ipv4/ipvs/Makefile
> make menuconfig
..snip..
OK, I'll buy that :) I had read the README that came with 1.0.9 more than once
as well.. And now I've reread it repeatedly :)
What is absolutely not obvious (to me at least) from it or the mini how-to or
anything else I've read is whether or not compiling a new kernel is even
necessary. I've worked with lots of packages where it's an either/or. Patch the
kernel and compile up a new kernel image and boot on it and you have feature X
available. OR, with the kernel source from your running kernel compile a module
and insmod it into the running "stock" kernel and you have the same feature.
With LVS is either option valid or do *both* have to be done? I'm testing on
RedHat 9 with their RPM of kernel 2.4.20-18.9 and installed the src.rpm just
now and symlinked /usr/src/linux-2.4.20-18.9 to /usr/src/linux. I then cd'ed to
that directory and did the 2 patches I outlined above and then cd'ed to ~/ipvs-
1.0.9/ipvs and typed "make" and it failed to build. That appeared to be what
the README was describing for a "module-only" build... I'll try your longer
instructions with a full kernel build in a second. I suspect the "linux-2.4.20-
ipvs-1.0.9.patch.gz - May 21, 2003" is what I would have needed for a full
kernel build instead and it's README spells out what you described :)
What I downloaded initially is the "netfilter module" and I'm assuming that can
be built as a module for a pre-existing kernel and insmod'ed and all will be
well? I've not gotten it to compile yet though and just want to make sure
a "patched" kernel doesn't need to also be built before this step...
Thanks!
|
