[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:0.132 / U:0.680 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site