| 1 |
On 07/19/12 03:05, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> AFAIK, neither genkernel nor dracut were expected to get tied to the |
| 4 |
>> Gentoo update process. Has that changed? |
| 5 |
> We don't even update kernels as part of the regular update process, |
| 6 |
> let alone initramfs systems. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> In general you update them together. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> The only issue I could see is if problems arise if you have a |
| 11 |
> different version of udev in your initramfs than on your system. I |
| 12 |
> don't know if that actually causes problems. For the most part after |
| 13 |
> the system is booted the initramfs is done its job. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> If some package did need a kernel/initramfs/etc to be updated it |
| 16 |
> should be the subject of news or an ewarn unless it becomes routine |
| 17 |
> practice. I don't think we want the system to start touching these |
| 18 |
> things without operator intervention unless we make it really |
| 19 |
> bulletproof like they do on big distros (the only reason they can is |
| 20 |
> they have one-size-fits-all kernels and initramfs designs). |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
And here's an epic failure mode waiting to happen - what if the kernel |
| 24 |
is not stored in /boot ? |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
I can think of at least two common setups where that happens. One is |
| 27 |
virtual machines (Xen for example usually stores the kernel outside the |
| 28 |
guest filesystem), the other is systems with full-disk encryption where |
| 29 |
you don't have a bootloader on the local disk. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Ah, who would have guessed that there are linux installs that are not |
| 32 |
single-disk desktops! |
Archives