| 1 |
On 01/29/2019 01:08 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> Obviously. Hence the reason I said that it shouldn't matter if the |
| 3 |
> module is built in-kernel. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
I'm saying it does matter. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
> I'm not sure why it seems like we're talking past each other here... |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
You seem to be focusing on the second kernel that the initramfs execs. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I'm talking about the first kernel that the initramfs uses. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
The initramfs won't be able to do crap if it doesn't have the device and |
| 14 |
file system drives necessary for the initramfs kernel & init scripts to |
| 15 |
boot. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> Now, it might not support a kernel that doesn't support module loading |
| 18 |
> at all, though I'm not sure why not. If it doesn't I could see why the |
| 19 |
> developers wouldn't be bothered to address the use case. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Yet another possible reason to dislike dracut. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Grant. . . . |
| 27 |
unix || die |
Archives