Messages in this thread | | | From | Rob Landley <> | Subject | Re: Hardwired drivers are going away? | Date | Mon, 14 Jan 2002 09:19:01 -0500 |
| |
On Monday 14 January 2002 02:09 pm, Alexander Viro wrote:
> But it still leaves you with tristate - instead of yes/module/no it's > yes/yes, but don't put it on initramfs/no. However, dependencies become > simpler - all you need is "I want this, that and that on initramfs" and > the rest can be found by depmod (i.e. configurator doesn't have to deal > with "FOO goes on initramfs (== old Y), so BAR and BAZ must go there > (== can't be M)").
This is something I've wondered about and would like to ask for clarification on: the relationship between the initramfs image and the kernel, build process-wise.
How much of the build process for the initramfs will be integrated with the kernel build? Since the kernel won't boot without a matching initramfs, I take it that some kind of initramfs will be a kernel build target now?
There's been a lot of talk about having the source for a mini-libc (uclibc, dietlibc, some combo) in the kernel tree, and other people saying we should just grab the binary for build purposes. The most obvious model I can think of for klibc staying seperate from the kernel is the user-space pcmcia/cardbus hotplug stuff, but that DID get integrated into the kernel.
The klibc source/binary debate still seems to be ongoing, but apart from that, will the build process for initramfs be part of the kernel build or not?
Rob. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |