1 |
Hello Amadeusz, |
2 |
|
3 |
|
4 |
On 09/01/2012 01:46 PM, Amadeusz Żołnowski wrote: |
5 |
> I propose to extract the initramfs generator from Genkernel and |
6 |
> make it a standalone project. |
7 |
|
8 |
Any ideas how that could be done best on a technical level? |
9 |
|
10 |
|
11 |
> The rest of the Genkernel could be rewritten to support both |
12 |
> Gentoo's initramfs generator, Dracut and maybe some other in the |
13 |
> future. Of course this would be my job to do so and I'm only |
14 |
> asking for acceptance from you. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> Another problem arisen is the name and versioning. Solutions: |
17 |
> |
18 |
> 1) The framework integrating old Genkernel and Dracut could be |
19 |
> just bumped to: |
20 |
> |
21 |
> a) 4 - because there's no official 4.x release, b) 5 - because |
22 |
> there's an unofficial and dead 4.x: |
23 |
> https://github.com/eedgar/genkernel4 |
24 |
|
25 |
Either would be fine by me. |
26 |
|
27 |
|
28 |
> 2) The framework could be named genboot, because it actually takes |
29 |
> care of kernel, initramfs and boot manager entries. Although we're |
30 |
> losing old good name. |
31 |
> |
32 |
> I am definitely for (1). The extracted old internal Genkernel |
33 |
> initramfs generator would need to be named differently for either |
34 |
> case, for example: geninitrd, geninitramfs, genifs, genird or |
35 |
> geninitfs. |
36 |
|
37 |
Out of those "geninitramfs" seems best to me. The "gen" prefix can be |
38 |
read as "generate" rather than "Gentoo" but "genkernel" has always had |
39 |
that problem, too. |
40 |
|
41 |
Best, |
42 |
|
43 |
|
44 |
|
45 |
Sebastian |