lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Nov]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 2.6 early userspace init
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);}
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:58    [W:0.069 / U:0.096 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site