From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <001c01c3bb0a$e18eb900$0400a8c0@eurostudio.local> From: "AlessandroPPC" To: "Wolfgang Denk" Cc: References: <20031203181613.75859C5F5F@atlas.denx.de> Subject: R: ram root filesystem Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 09:36:28 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: Many Thanks Wolfgang Denk for your indacations. Something abaut your questions. > Question 1: why don't you use the much simpler and smaller setup > based on the SELF ramdisk example image included with the ELDK? > Please see http://www.denx.de/twiki/bin/view/DULG/HowToAddFiles My application now is running and it is stable with nfs-ELDK package, and I want pass to ram fs to do a more efficiently embedded system with the minimum difference respect to nfs because I don't want to lose the stability. > Question 2: Why don't you simply use the genext2fs tool that comes > included with the ELDK? It is much simpler, and requires no root > permissions to create a ramdisk image. > Yes I will try the genext2fs tool . > The "rc.sysint" was never meant to be used from a ramdisk based root > filesystem. If you change your configuration, you are expected to > adapt all related config files and init scripts, too. Ok I 'm just adapting my config files and init scripts. > > It makes no sense to run fsck on a ramdisk image which was just > unpacked. Also, IMHO it makes littlee sense to use the full-blown > SysV init style scripts in an embedded system which is running from a > ramdisk image. > Yes I agree, but the question is : why a tool thought to check fs don't work on my fs image? Where is the mistake? Sorry, but what do yo mean with IMHO ? > Have a look at the ELF image thatis included with the ELDK, and use > this as a base. > I'm investigating abaut your ELF image... Thanks again, Regards, Alessandro ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/