From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263828AbTKLQxk (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Nov 2003 11:53:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263846AbTKLQxk (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Nov 2003 11:53:40 -0500 Received: from ns.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:10134 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263828AbTKLQxe (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Nov 2003 11:53:34 -0500 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:53:33 +0100 From: Michael Schroeder To: "Bryan O'Sullivan" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.6 early userspace init Message-ID: <20031112165333.GA31882@suse.de> References: <20031112115021.GA24875@suse.de> <1068655518.14435.37.camel@camp4.serpentine.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1068655518.14435.37.camel@camp4.serpentine.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-GPG-Key: 2048G/BBC5057B Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 08:45:19AM -0800, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote: > On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 03:50, Michael Schroeder wrote: > > > how about adding something like this to init/do_mounts.c? > > It's not a bad idea, but surely you should be using the init= boot > parameter instead of hard-coding a path. I'm not so sure about this. One can argue that the init= parameter should be evaluated by kinit when calling the real init. > In any case, I don't think you should expect a patch to be accepted. > There's not much point in further crufting up do_mounts.c in generic > kernels during 2.6, until do_mounts moves completely out of the kernel. > Some people are happy enough with root=0:0, so there's not obviously a > consensus about which stopgap measure will do for now. Well, root=0:0 also needs a kernel patch and has the disadvantage that one cannot specify the desired root as a boot option. The point is that it is impossible to use initramfs as a initrd replacement with the current code (2.6-test9), so one of the patches should go in, either the 0:0 patch or my patch. Cheers, Michael. -- Michael Schroeder mls@suse.de main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);}