From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Phillip Susi Subject: Re: What is e2initrd_helper? Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 18:19:05 -0400 Message-ID: <4F860359.8000603@ubuntu.com> References: <4F85A740.9080906@ubuntu.com> <4F85A965.3040008@redhat.com> <20120411182736.GH12044@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Eric Sandeen , ext4 development To: Ted Ts'o Return-path: Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.120]:10932 "EHLO cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933478Ab2DKWTH (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Apr 2012 18:19:07 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20120411182736.GH12044@thunk.org> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 04/11/2012 02:27 PM, Ted Ts'o wrote: > Debian used to have a system where we could transparently update the > root file system to use ext4 file system features as part of the > initrd. > > At one point I had hopes that we could fix up the boot scripts so that > if an initrd was present, we could run e2fsck out of the initrd, so we > wouldn't have to play games with mounting the file system read-only. > So at one point the plan was this program would also extract all of > /etc/fstab for the initrd, and other things that might be useful > before the root file system was mounted. > > I've since decided that this would involve getting fsck all-too-bound > up in distribution-specific init systems, and might actually aid and > abet the further dominance of GNOME-OS (or plymouth/upstart; I dispise > all of the modern init/initscripts systems equally), so I've since > stopped trying to implement things in that particular design > direction. So does this mean it is now cruft and should be removed at some point? > It's why I'll be abandoning Ubuntu when the new Ivy Bridge laptops > become available, and switching not to Fedora, but to Debian Testing > --- but I'm sure Mark Shuttleworth really doesn't care what distro > people like me choose to use.... :-) AFAIK, Ubuntu uses Debian's initramfs system... are you saying this is not the case? If so, what's the difference? When I attended the last UDS there was actually a push coming from the arm folks to do away with the initrd on systems that do not require it ( no LVM ) to accelerate boot time by not wasting time loading another file, which apparently is rather slow on the arm boot loader. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPhgNZAAoJEJrBOlT6nu75bGkIALYdwv2542miponYdnt6bX3x D/rc0oersb7VNe12DV6++Xp2/PWFQRZCdDWDMWUw6gVyE9PYElK6a39MMoKQtBod RkbWFpI20hG0lkIxNGt55w16+xPMUSD9KRY7MT2R3qXoLd1sKkbummVOdrNJnrT/ WHeK1BpVrXbE6qqlD8DdJtHbBAkCDTz08IKjkEXBMsovmAeIq8PVvG2L9foUCX7o HDzttaLXdBcQ42/ytWm3xRNJET0Bh/Cmg7TBGBHwkxpylIRgEg5ZgvLNPaWTA5eJ l6eQsaL18r9Yn8lvDTq5fpxukbAh229NhhzzrcPl82E3P+cBC4AuSUX/W2hQqPc= =P8AI -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----