1 |
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 04:27:35 PM Rich Freeman wrote: |
2 |
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Joost Roeleveld <joost@××××××××.org> wrote: |
3 |
> > On Thursday, September 15, 2011 09:27:06 AM Zac Medico wrote: |
4 |
> > > It should be similar to how sys-apps/v86d is used for uvesafb |
5 |
> > > support. |
6 |
> > > It installs /usr/share/v86d/initramfs and when you configure your |
7 |
> > > kernel, you set CONFIG_INITRAMFS_SOURCE="/usr/share/v86d/initramfs" |
8 |
> > > in |
9 |
> > > order to have in included in your kernel image. |
10 |
> > |
11 |
> > Will this be set somewhere globally to the initramfs automatically? |
12 |
> > And doesn't this mean that a new kernel will need to be build just to |
13 |
> > satisfy |
14 |
> > this? |
15 |
> > |
16 |
> > I'm trying to think of how best to avoid users who are not aware to get |
17 |
> > caught |
18 |
> > with non-booting systems. |
19 |
> > |
20 |
> > Wouldn't automatic inclusion into grub.conf be a better approach? Not |
21 |
> > sure if |
22 |
> > grub.conf can handle a "global" setting for initramfs. |
23 |
> |
24 |
> Well, the only way to set a kernel config parameter is to rebuild the |
25 |
> kernel. There might be some way to extract the built-in initramfs (every |
26 |
> kernel has one) and replace it with the new one without rebuilding it, but I |
27 |
> doubt most users would prefer that we mount /boot and start modifying their |
28 |
> kernel images. |
29 |
|
30 |
I wasn't actually talking about changing kernels, but was wondering if |
31 |
grub.conf has some option for a "global" initramfs. I couldn't find anything |
32 |
in the manpage. |
33 |
|
34 |
> Changes to grub.conf will only be properly merged if /boot is mounted, if |
35 |
> grub is installed (don't laugh - I checked and since my system was migrated |
36 |
> so many times I don't actually have the package installed any longer), and |
37 |
> the user actually merges the changes in. Fiddling with grub.conf isn't |
38 |
> exactly risk-free either. |
39 |
|
40 |
I know, which is why I was asking for a "default" option for the initrd/module |
41 |
part. |
42 |
|
43 |
> I think something like this is best handled via news. |
44 |
|
45 |
And perhaps also an announcement on gentoo-user. I think a lot of users are |
46 |
subscribed to there. |
47 |
|
48 |
> Note also that depending on your definition of "broken" the separate /usr |
49 |
> situation is already broken. It will probably steadily become more broken |
50 |
> over time, so when it stops booting altogether for any particular user might |
51 |
> happen anytime from a year ago to never. |
52 |
|
53 |
In what way is it broken? |
54 |
I've only seen comments about where some udev-rules seem to expect /usr to be |
55 |
present when run and udev not properly handling these cases. (I know this is |
56 |
the very short version) |
57 |
|
58 |
If an installation works and none of the udev-rules depend on /usr (or /var, |
59 |
....) then a seperate /usr should not be considered "broken". |
60 |
My desktop is up-to-date and none of my udev-rules even have a "RUN+=" part. |
61 |
|
62 |
Only my server has these for Xen-devices and these aren't run until |
63 |
"xendomains" starts and this is quite late in the boot-sequence. |
64 |
|
65 |
All my machines have /usr on LVM. |
66 |
|
67 |
-- |
68 |
Joost |