1 |
On Sun, 27 Oct 2019 16:17:04 +0000 |
2 |
Michael Everitt <gentoo@×××××××.xyz> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On 27/10/19 16:12, Matt Turner wrote: |
5 |
> > On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 3:06 AM James Le Cuirot <chewi@g.o> wrote: |
6 |
> >> On Sun, 27 Oct 2019 05:38:48 -0400 |
7 |
> >> Joshua Kinard <kumba@g.o> wrote: |
8 |
> >> |
9 |
> >>> Why do I not like an initramfs, though? Well, for one, it complicates the |
10 |
> >>> kernel compiles (and it makes them bigger, something which is an issue on |
11 |
> >>> the old SGI systems at times). Two, it's another layer that I have to |
12 |
> >>> maintain. Three, it violates, in my mind, the simplicity of keeping the |
13 |
> >>> kernel and userland separated (e.g., kernel does kernel-y things, userland |
14 |
> >>> does userland-y things). |
15 |
> >> You make it sound like the initramfs has to be built into the kernel |
16 |
> >> image. It can be but it usually isn't. I suspect you know that though? |
17 |
> >> Admittedly that does depend on support from your bootloader. While GRUB |
18 |
> >> and U-Boot have supported this for years, I forget what oddball |
19 |
> >> bootloaders your hardware may be using. |
20 |
> > Though he's likely not using it, GRUB2 supports all the platforms he |
21 |
> > mentioned (x86, amd64, sparc64, [sgi] mips). |
22 |
> > |
23 |
> FWIW, I do believe I saw LILO mentioned .. |
24 |
|
25 |
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Early_Userspace_Mounting#Configuring_LILO |
26 |
|
27 |
Phew. ;-) |
28 |
|
29 |
Actually I was getting confused between initramfs support and device |
30 |
tree support. I think every bootloader has supported initramfs since |
31 |
forever. |
32 |
|
33 |
-- |
34 |
James Le Cuirot (chewi) |
35 |
Gentoo Linux Developer |