1 |
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@×××××.com> wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
3 |
>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 14:09:34 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote: |
4 |
>> |
5 |
>>> At this point I don't know that 1) the image is actually in the |
6 |
>>> kernel, or 2) that my "init thingy" ;-) image would work, but at least |
7 |
>>> the process of putting it together is verifiable. |
8 |
>> |
9 |
>> That's why I put in all the debug stuff, so I could watch the progress of |
10 |
>> the script as it ran. |
11 |
>> |
12 |
> |
13 |
> |
14 |
> OK, I'll look at combining that part my my scripts, or just using yours, etc. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> Thanks for the help, |
17 |
> Mark |
18 |
|
19 |
Neil, |
20 |
One more question if I might. What's the simplest way to regenerate |
21 |
the kernel when there are no kernel changes but you have changes to |
22 |
the programs that are going into the initramfs? make clean seems like |
23 |
overkill to me, and it's very slow to boot. |
24 |
|
25 |
I suspect that one of the simplest failures on an initramfs is that |
26 |
you update something that's contained in the initramfs, mdadm or |
27 |
busybox or whatever, and then don't get that new stuff into the |
28 |
initramfs. Seems like I need to be right on top of what I'm keeping in |
29 |
it and make sure a new kernel gets generated any time those packages |
30 |
are updated. Correct? |
31 |
|
32 |
Anyway, I'm wondering how you manage that? |
33 |
|
34 |
Should be booting my first kernel with the initramfs in it shortly. |
35 |
We'll see how that goes. |
36 |
|
37 |
Thanks, |
38 |
Mark |