[lkml]   [2003]   [Mar]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] update filesystems config. menu
    > On Sat, 15 Mar 2003 09:08:44 -0800 (PST)
    > "Randy.Dunlap" <> wrote:
    >> I'm having trouble decoding...
    >> What is it that "should be safest for most people"?
    >> Are you suggesting any changes here?
    >> And some of us don't use fs modules, just build what we need into the
    >> kernel. Do you know of any problems with doing this (related to ext2/ext3
    >> for example)?
    > I was just saying that recommending it (ext2) compiled into the kernel and
    > not a module should be the safe route for newbies to kernel
    > compiles.

    Thanks for the clarification.

    > Those of us that have build a few to feel comfortable with it, will know to
    > compile the fs of our / partition into the kernel.
    > Except if ext2 is not the most commonly used fs anymore. I guess a 'cool'
    > feature could be if the make system could 'detect' what your current root is
    > and warn if you do not have that compiled into your kernel, but I do not
    > know the limitations of it (the make system).
    > Then on the other hand, would above be confusing if its a kernel
    > compiled for another box ?

    Yes, I'd say so, although the message could say something like:
    Kernel does not include a filesystem for / on this computer.
    And would it also have to check the capabilities of what's in the
    initrd? (not that I'm advocating any of this)


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:34    [W:0.023 / U:2.708 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site