Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > At the moment mkinitrd goes through a big hoo-hah where it tries to > determine what precise set of kernel modules are needed to mount the > root filesystem, and no more. > > But I don't understand why we don't just put every possible block > device driver / LVM / crypto module / etc. into the initrd. The > ramdisk is discarded as soon as the root filesystem is mounted, so at > most we're saving a few kilobytes of disk space. At the same time, > mkinitrd is massively more complicated than it really needs to be, and > initrd images are non-portable between machines[*]. > here's one: the !@#$%^&* xen-pv driver(s). the equally !@#$%^&* xen tools present an xvd & hda to a FV guest; xenbus code reads xenstore & (blindly) creates the /dev/xvd[a-?] device file, whether used or not, but doesn't get rid of it if it isn't hooked up/used. along comes anaconda, opens such an device, which is empty, and anaconda hacks a fur-ball. We can go on for a long time why the xen code & tools are all messed up, but we have a life, and need to move on.... So, to deal with such problems & further your recommendation, though, I suggest that mkinitrd make everything *but what it is told to exclude*. The exclusion list is small; the inclusion (working) list is large. a --with would override the default exclusion list. overall, I agree in principal; include the kitchen sink; exclude what has corner cases that break stuff, or fix the broken cases, instead of having tools (anaconda) work around all the crazy options / conditions. - Don > The particular problem I am encountering is with P2V and V2V > conversions. Because typically virtio-blk drivers aren't included, we > have to take extra steps to run 'mkinitrd --with virtio_pci --with > virtio_blk'. Doing this from a script is not just massively > complicated (we have to run it within the context of a guest > filesystem probably located inside a raw disk image), but completely > unnecessary if initrd just included all the drivers in the first > place. > > Thoughts? > > Rich. > > [*] They would still hard-code the root and swap partition names, but > I think it should be possible to get rid of those too and make initrd > images really portable. > -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list