Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 5 Dec 2001 16:56:43 +0000 (GMT) | From | Matt Bernstein <> | Subject | Re: newly compiled kernel no .img file |
| |
At 11:40 -0500 Brian Gerst wrote:
>> If you notice the first declaration of image the > >> "initrd=/boot/initrd-2.4.7-10.img" is not present . Of course I removed >> it so that there would be no kernel panic and I am able to boot into the >> new kernel (xunil). > What I want to know is what is this .img file why >> is it required in the original kernel compilation and not in the newer . > >Your distribution put that there so that it can use modules for drivers >that are required to mount the root filesystem (ie. SCSI, fs driver, >etc.). If you build your own kernel, those drivers should be built >non-modular, therefore you won't need an initrd.
Yes for most users.
I'd like to build a quite generic 2.4 tree with everything as a module where possible. I am forced to compile in binfmt_elf, initrd and romfs.
This allows me to use one tree for several different machines (some might have an ext3 / on an IDE HDD; others maybe reiserfs on a gdth controller etc..) without a huge amount of dead code in the kernel. So.. when a subset of them are buggy we can see what modules they have in common..
My question: is this mega-module setup likely to be less stable than a monolith? I'm not fussed about a % or two performance loss.
Matt
- 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/
| |