Re: klibc (was: 2.6.18 -mm merge plans)

Nigel Cunningham
2006-06-07T04:24:28Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1559 bytes --]

Hi.

On Wednesday 07 June 2006 14:10, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Followup to: <200606071400.49980.ncunningham@linuxmail.org>
> By author: Nigel Cunningham <ncunningham@linuxmail.org>
> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> > Hi.
> >
> > Sorry for coming in late. I've only just resubscribed after my move.
> >
> > Not sure who originally said this...
> >
> > > > > problems it entails.) The initial code to have removed
> > > > > is the root-mounting code, with all the various ugly
> > > > > mutations of that (ramdisk loading, NFS root, initrd...)
> >
> > Could I get more explanation of what this means and its implications? I'm
> > thinking in particular about the implications for suspending to disk.
> > Will it imply that everyone will _have_ to have an initramfs with some
> > userspace program that sets up device nodes and so on, even if at the
> > moment all you have is root=/dev/hda1 resume2=swap:/dev/hda2?
>
> Yes. That initramfs is embedded in the kernel image.
>
> > Along similar lines, I had been considering eventually including support
> > for putting an image in place of the initrd (for embedded).
>
> You can still override the default buildin initramfs. Then you get
> the benefit of not carrying a bunch of code with you that can never be
> executed.

Ok. Ta. I guess I should put some time into learning this prior to 2.6.18
then, so I can help others through the transition.

Regards,

Nigel
--
Nigel, Michelle and Alisdair Cunningham
5 Mitchell Street
Cobden 3266
Victoria, Australia

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]