On Tue, 2005-05-17 at 01:44 +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 May 2005 01:13, Peter Jones <pjones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > initrd. Sure an initrd can support ext2 with labels, but that's not
> > > being done at the moment and such a significant change is unlikely to be
> > > made to the installer in a hurry.
> >
> > Anaconda has been using initramfs for boot media since November. Are
> > you sure you mean initrd?
>
> That was my understanding of it, I thought that initrd=whatever for the boot
> loaded made it use initrd. Could you please give me a URL for the correct
> information.
I don't have a url, but if you look at linux/init/initramfs.c, it
appears to just check the magic bytes for the filesystem in whatever you
pass it; if it's a cramfs image, it uses initramfs.
> > Regardless of that, why isn't ld.so.cache's context getting set
> > correctly from the data in the glibc package?
>
> The cache file is created by ldconfig. So it's not an issue of the glibc
> package or RPM. We could patch ldconfig to specifically request the context
> we desire (using the same mechanism that rpm uses to determine the correct
> file type), but that seems like a waste as such code would only be needed for
> the install.
Why can't the glibc package provide a ld.so.cache which simply indicates
no libraries? This seems more correct to me, especially as it claims
ownership of the file.
--
Peter
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
