| 1 |
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 3:50 AM, Alex Schuster <wonko@×××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Jörg Schaible writes: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> Alex Schuster wrote: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
>> > I would be surprised if it had this feature. AFAIK grub is already done |
| 7 |
>> > at this stage, the kernel has taken over. And I guess it does not know |
| 8 |
>> > about the LABEL= syntax, and has no code to scan all devices for file |
| 9 |
>> > system labels. |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> I fear so, too. Grub finds the boot device properly, it's the kernel |
| 12 |
>> complaining about the value in the root option. |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> > With an initramfs, the kernel runs an init script which can do various |
| 15 |
>> > stuff, like probing all devices for file system labels. |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> I never had the need for an initrd. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Now you do :) |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Wonko |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Wonko, |
| 24 |
I did my first initramfs build this last week to get RAID6 working |
| 25 |
for /. It went well and I was impressed at how much I could debug in a |
| 26 |
shell before I got it working correctly. (Big issue for me - make sure |
| 27 |
you copy all the /dev/sdX stuff you are going to need into the |
| 28 |
initramfs, and make sure mdadm is built static.) |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
QUESTION: What's the difference between initrd and initramfs in |
| 31 |
practice. As I understand it initramfs is the newer one. I assume that |
| 32 |
means it's preferred? Or are there times when someone wants to still |
| 33 |
use an initrd? |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Thanks, |
| 36 |
Mark |
Archives