Victor Lowther (victor.lowther@xxxxxxxxx) said: > > > http://git.surfsite.org/dracut.git > > > git://surfsite.org/pub/git/dracut.git > > > > Wasn't the entire point to make the initramfs generic? > > No, to make the initramfs generator generic. A subtle but important > distinction. Nope. The plan was (quoting earlier mails to the list, from the creators...): ... [I]nstead of scripts hard-coded to do various things, we depend on udev to create device nodes for us and then when we have the rootfs's device node, we mount and carry on ... There's another reason this is really useful. If something goes wrong, remotely debugging a users initrd right is a lot easier if you know what it looks like. Right now, in Fedora for eg, where we generate an initrd for each users system at runtime, we need to get a copy of the generated initrd, and pull it apart just to find out what modules ended up in there, what didn't, and then somehow try to work backwards to try and figure out how the generator got into that state. After doing this for five years, let me tell you it's _really_ _really_ painful. ... And now we've got large patchsets that: - make the initramfs non-generic (in fact, machine-specific) - handle various device types through shell snippets, not udev (raid, crypt, etc.) - farm everything out to random modules, so no initramfs is alike I think something's been lost here. Bill -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe initramfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
