From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Volker Armin Hemmann Subject: Re: Linux mdadm superblock question. Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 19:27:06 +0100 Message-ID: <201002171927.07051.volkerarmin@googlemail.com> References: <201002140251.59668.volkerarmin@googlemail.com> <20100217181016.GA14983@emergent.ellipticsemi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20100217181016.GA14983@emergent.ellipticsemi.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Nick Bowler Cc: david@lang.hm, Kyle Moffett , Rudy Zijlstra , Neil Brown , "Mr. James W. Laferriere" , Bill Davidsen , Michael Evans , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Mittwoch 17 Februar 2010, Nick Bowler wrote: > On 09:41 Wed 17 Feb , david@lang.hm wrote: > > for a distro that is trying to make one kernel image run on every > > possible type of hardware features like initramfs (and udev, modeul= es, > > etc) are wonderful. > >=20 > > however for people who run systems that are known ahead of time and > > static (and who build their own kernels instead of just relying on = the > > distro default kernel), all of this is unnessesary complication, wh= ich > > leaves more room for problems to creep in. >=20 > Such people can easily construct an initramfs containing busybox and > mdadm with a shell script hardcoded to mount their root fs and run > switch_root. It's a ~10 minute jobbie that only needs to be done onc= e. and even better when you don't have to do that one time job at all. btw, what about additional delay?=20 Gl=FCck Auf, Volker