Re: F38 proposal: Unified Kernel Support Phase 1 (System-Wide Change proposal)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



This entire proposal although has write ideas (I also like to see UKI
in Fedora as I have use UKI on Arch and undestand its advantages) is in
the wrong.

But why start doing UKI without first fixing the need of host specific
initrd and commandline. I am sure even non-UEFI users will be better of
of not having a host specific initrd. We should first start working on
shipping initrd on dedora as an rpm with atleast one use which can be
extended by sysext or someother mechanism without the need of UKI
first. Once That is possible that UKI can be easily be intgrated and
tested. We will be also provide a subset of benefits to the non-UEFI
users(for example on other arches). Let first get any gpt or lvm rootfs
work with this model then look.

Thanks & Regards
Marc Pervaz Boocha

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux