Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:53:33 +0100 | From | Michael Schroeder <> | Subject | Re: 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/
| |