| 1 |
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 11:52:46AM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Alec Warner <antarus@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > |
| 4 |
> > Debian / Ubuntu have a tool that basically does this. Its |
| 5 |
> > update-initramfs. I believe it is called from..the postinst of |
| 6 |
> > packages that are supposed to be in the initramfs? honestly I'd have |
| 7 |
> > to look up how they implemented it. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Not a bad idea, with a corresponding eselect tool to control what kind |
| 10 |
> of initramfs you have (dracut, genkernel, none, |
| 11 |
> remind-me-but-I-roll-my-own, etc). The ebuild would just call the |
| 12 |
> function, and the function would handle it accordingly. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
The issue there is "packages that are supposed to be in the initramfs," since |
| 15 |
we've been told the initramfs is a custom thing for our situation. (Which is |
| 16 |
kinda my issue with just dumping the whole problem on end-users and admins |
| 17 |
who are not using a prepackaged distro without customisation, instead of |
| 18 |
maintaining backward-compatibility.) |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Mind, I don't have an issue with developers deciding certain packages are |
| 21 |
critical: after all the same knowledge informs what should be on root. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
I just don't think that the above answers the problem comprehensively (and |
| 24 |
thus it isn't worth the maintenance headache, if it can be avoided.) |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
All the tutorials, and packages, I've seen on the forums take you through |
| 27 |
deciding exactly what you need in the initramfs. So given that each user |
| 28 |
has a potentially different set of stuff on there, the robust method would |
| 29 |
appear to require the mangler to know which packages had files on there, and |
| 30 |
to update them accordingly (or run the generation tool, or warn, as you said) |
| 31 |
when one of that set were updated. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Simply triggering a warning when one of a named set is built, sounds like a |
| 34 |
start. (The initramfs generation script could run qfile to build/check the |
| 35 |
set.) Thereafter it's "just" a matter of hooking into that, if the functionality |
| 36 |
is not already present. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
(I don't run unstable portage any more, as I need to be close to what end-users |
| 39 |
of our emerge wrapper are using, so I'm not up on the current state of 2.2. I'd |
| 40 |
prefer not to have to script round this issue, since it doesn't affect me at all.) |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
Regards, |
| 43 |
SteveL. |
| 44 |
-- |
| 45 |
#friendly-coders -- We're friendly, but we're not /that/ friendly ;-) |
Archives