| 1 |
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 4:46 AM, Stefan G. Weichinger <lists@×××××.at> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am 15.05.2014 20:33, schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés: |
| 3 |
>> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Stefan G. Weichinger <lists@×××××.at> wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> Am 15.05.2014 20:05, schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés: |
| 5 |
>>> |
| 6 |
>>>> With -H, you don't get the kernel cmdline, and therefore your kernel |
| 7 |
>>>> cannot load your LVM volumes since it doesn't know their... names? I |
| 8 |
>>>> don't knot the terminology. |
| 9 |
>>>> |
| 10 |
>>>> In any case, you need to set --hostonly-cmdline (or |
| 11 |
>>>> hostonly_cmdline="yes" in the config file), *besides* -H. |
| 12 |
>>> |
| 13 |
>>> ok ... I pulled your changes (kerninst) from github ... on the web I see |
| 14 |
>>> it, but it doesn't get into my copy here ... strange. |
| 15 |
>>> |
| 16 |
>>> As I don't need it right now, I will (a) wait or (b) edit manually. |
| 17 |
>>> |
| 18 |
>>> No problem. |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
>> I actually *removed* -H from kerninst. That should be configured in |
| 21 |
>> the user's dracut.conf; now I have: |
| 22 |
>> |
| 23 |
>> hostonly="yes" |
| 24 |
>> hostonly_cmdline="yes" |
| 25 |
>> |
| 26 |
>> in my dracut.conf. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> Yes, I understood ... thanks. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> Aside from that a more general question: |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> Does it it any way help to have a *small* (= as small as possible) |
| 33 |
> initramfs? |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> Maybe on embedded systems but on the big multi-GB-ram-machines we use it |
| 36 |
> doesn't make much difference, right? |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
AFAIU, no, it doesn't. As long as the (uncompressed) initramfs fits |
| 39 |
into the RAM, its size doesn't matter. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
> I ask because in all my reorganizing furor I also thought that now with |
| 42 |
> btrfs only I could get rid of "lvm mdraid" as dracut-modules. I can try |
| 43 |
> ... ;-) (don't call me "ricer") |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Whatever gets rid of LVM is good on my book. I've never understood why |
| 46 |
people uses it, and in my experience it only brings headaches. |
| 47 |
Besides, I've heard from many people that btrfs is the way to go in |
| 48 |
the future. I'm not ready to make the change yet, but I will at some |
| 49 |
point. |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
> Additional in this context: does it make a noticeable difference which |
| 52 |
> "Kernel compression mode" you choose? I assume it is again an issue for |
| 53 |
> systems with (a) small boot-partitions and/or (b) slower CPUs to select |
| 54 |
> something special here. |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
Given the size of the kernel, I don't thin the difference can be |
| 57 |
humanly measured. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
> I checked and see that I use LZ4 anyway already ... seems to be the |
| 60 |
> fastest to unpack as far as I understand the help text. |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
It will be a difference of microseconds, if not nanoseconds. I |
| 63 |
honestly don't think it matters at all. |
| 64 |
|
| 65 |
> And then, who writes the howto condensed out of this thread? ;-) |
| 66 |
> Much to learn and understand as always, I appreciate it a lot. |
| 67 |
|
| 68 |
Regards. |
| 69 |
-- |
| 70 |
Canek Peláez Valdés |
| 71 |
Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias |
| 72 |
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México |
Archives