From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Luca Berra Subject: Re: RFC - device names and mdadm with some reference to udev. Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 07:21:37 +0100 Message-ID: <20081028062137.GB7764@percy.comedia.it> References: <18692.62860.863118.727187@notabene.brown> <20081027082257.GB1801@piper.oerlikon.madduck.net> <1225120416.4845.128.camel@firewall.xsintricity.com> <20081027161000.GG17300@skl-net.de> <20081027165949.GC3061@piper.oerlikon.madduck.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Kay Sievers Cc: Andre Noll , Doug Ledford , Neil Brown , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, Michal Marek List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 07:31:57PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote: >On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 17:59, martin f krafft wrote: >> also sprach Kay Sievers [2008.10.27.1737 +0100]: >>> It's very simple to setup and follows the same logic as udev running >>> in the rootfs, There is absolutely no "increase of complexity" >>> involved if you use udev in the real root anyway, you just copy the >>> binaries and the rules, and on bootup you wait for /dev/root to show >>> up, mount it and start /sbin/init. Custom busybox stuff does not >>> support any non-trivial feature a "general purpose" distro needs to >>> support today. >> >> I would love to see some explicit instructions, then I could carry >> them into Debian, > >What do you miss from the Ubuntu setup? > >> which is currently using full-blown udev with >> initramfs. > >Which is the right thing to do, yes. > i believe it is overkill initramfs should have the sole purpose of finding and mounting the root filesystem, there is no need in packing it with unneeded junk. L. -- Luca Berra -- bluca@comedia.it Communication Media & Services S.r.l. /"\ \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN X AGAINST HTML MAIL / \