| 1 |
On Dec 1, 2011 3:32 AM, "David W Noon" <dwnoon@××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
----- >8 snip |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> I have a working initramfs layout, but currently it is too large |
| 8 |
> (>32MiB) for my /boot partition. The problem package is e2fsprogs, as |
| 9 |
> it requires dynamic linkage and, consequently, a full-sized glibc. |
| 10 |
> This sucks, so I need to patch the Makefile(s) to build a more sensible |
| 11 |
> set of executables for an initramfs. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> All of the code I have written myself compiles and links statically, |
| 14 |
> typically using klibc, so my finished code is tiny. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> I haven't been working on this for a couple of months now, because the |
| 17 |
> need for it is not really pressing. The assertion that udev would |
| 18 |
> require /usr and /var (plus the kitchen sink) really soon is unfounded, |
| 19 |
> at least for those of us who run more elderly hardware. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Anyhow, when I'm finished there will be a zsh script that will build an |
| 22 |
> initramfs image, and even install it to /boot, with a single command. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
You know, Debian has an e2fsck-static package. Why don't Gentoo, I |
| 25 |
wonder... |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
That said, you *can* have an "almost-static" e2fsck if you compile it |
| 28 |
yourself. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Rgds, |
Archives