Re: 2.6 early userspace init

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>]

Followup to:  <1068655518.14435.37.camel@camp4.serpentine.com>
By author:    "Bryan O'Sullivan" <bos@serpentine.com>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> 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.
> 
> 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.
> 

I think it's useful to maintain bass-ackwards compatibility with
root=, especially since if any hack is put it now, it creates new
legacy.

Looking for init, or linuxrc, inside the initramfs makes sense.  It
should *NOT* be tied to the init= option, though... consider when all
of this is pulled out of kernel space; you don't want "init=" to break
finding your RAID volumes when you're trying to find a different
"real" init binary.

Having a kinit= option (or earlyinit= or whatever, kinit seems to be
the term we have been using) would be another matter, of course.

	-hpa
-- 
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
If you send me mail in HTML format I will assume it's spam.
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
Architectures needed: ia64 m68k mips64 ppc ppc64 s390 s390x sh v850 x86-64