Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] /usr vs. initramfs redux
Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2011 13:57:47
Message-Id: CAGfcS_ndOS5qhkPF5fOm6WCiqma-WS8huPDAeEGxdNv4G6V8CQ@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] /usr vs. initramfs redux by Matthew Summers
1 On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Matthew Summers
2 <quantumsummers@g.o> wrote:
3 > In point of fact all modern Linux kernels have an initramfs built in
4 > now, that when empty is effectively bypassed, so there is no wheel
5 > reinvention. To quote the docs [1]
6
7 Yes, but that embedded initramfs doesn't actually do much of anything
8 right now. It may exist from an architecture standpoint, but it
9 doesn't mean that there isn't a lot of work to be done which would be
10 redundant with work already done elsewhere.
11
12 I can see where you might want a simpler solution than dracut as an
13 alternative for more embedded setups/etc. It probably would be
14 cleaner to just create a new solution than modify dracut to get rid of
15 udev/etc.
16
17 In any case, as long as a solution exists for md+lvm+luks+/usr before
18 we start breaking more stuff than is already broken, then we should be
19 fine. Having more than one optional solution is fine. While I don't
20 think that gentoo needs to be another Ubuntu, having reasonable
21 out-of-the-box support for one of the major desktop environments
22 running on md+lvm+luks seems pretty useful.
23
24 Rich

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] /usr vs. initramfs redux "Robin H. Johnson" <robbat2@g.o>