| 1 |
On 01/29/2019 12:04 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> I don't see the value in using a different configuration on a box simply |
| 3 |
> because it happens to work on that particular box. Dracut is a more |
| 4 |
> generic solution that allows me to keep hosts the same. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
And if all the boxes in the fleet can function without an initramfs? |
| 7 |
Then why have it? Why not apply Occam's Razor & Parsimony and use the |
| 8 |
simpler solution. Especially if more complex solutions introduce |
| 9 |
additional things that need to be updated. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> Kinda sorta. The kernel boots one distro which then chroots and execs |
| 12 |
> another. The initramfs follows the exact same rules as any other |
| 13 |
> userspace rootfs. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
There's no "kinda" to it. Booting one distro (kernel & set of init |
| 16 |
scripts), then chrooting and execing a new kernel and the booting |
| 17 |
another distro is at least twice as complex as booting a single distro. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
This is even more complicated if the first initramfs distro is not |
| 20 |
identical to the main installed distro. Which is quite likely to be the |
| 21 |
case, or at least a subset of the main installed distro. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
IMHO an initramfs is usually, but not always, an unnecessary complication. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> Sure, and I wouldn't expect them to require rebuilding your initramfs |
| 26 |
> either. I was speaking generally. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Modifying things like crypttab and / or adding / removing file systems |
| 29 |
from the kernel that are required for boot have caused me to need to |
| 30 |
rebuild an initramfs in the past. But that was not necessarily Gentoo, |
| 31 |
so it may not be a fair comparison. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Grant. . . . |
| 37 |
unix || die |
Archives