| 1 |
Quoting Sebastian Pipping (2012-09-02 21:37:11) |
| 2 |
> On 09/01/2012 01:46 PM, Amadeusz Żołnowski wrote: |
| 3 |
> > I propose to extract the initramfs generator from Genkernel and make |
| 4 |
> > it a standalone project. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Any ideas how that could be done best on a technical level? |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
This is an announcement post. I'll share all of my ideas before I start |
| 9 |
implementation part. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> > 1) The framework integrating old Genkernel and Dracut could be just |
| 13 |
> > bumped to: |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > a) 4 - because there's no official 4.x release, |
| 16 |
> > b) 5 - because there's an unofficial and dead 4.x: |
| 17 |
> > https://github.com/eedgar/genkernel4 |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Either would be fine by me. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Does anybody prefer particular option? |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> > I am definitely for (1). The extracted old internal Genkernel |
| 25 |
> > initramfs generator would need to be named differently for either |
| 26 |
> > case, for example: geninitrd, geninitramfs, genifs, genird or |
| 27 |
> > geninitfs. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> Out of those "geninitramfs" seems best to me. The "gen" prefix can be |
| 30 |
> read as "generate" rather than "Gentoo" but "genkernel" has always had |
| 31 |
> that problem, too. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
+1 |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
I am still waiting for opinions of all involved in Genkernel. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
-- |
| 41 |
Amadeusz Żołnowski |
Archives