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

Re: Alternative root filesystem support

Glenn McGrath <bug1@optushome.com.au> writes:

> "Karl M. Hegbloom" wrote:
> > 
> > >>>>> "Goswin" == Goswin Brederlow <goswin.brederlow@student.uni-tuebingen.de> writes:
> > 
> >     Goswin> Hartmut Koptein <koptein@debian.org> writes:
> >     >> > Let's add one more bullet point for the new installer--namely,
> >     >> > alternative root filesystem support.  I and my colleagues would just
> >     >> > love to see ReiserFS support in woody's installer.
> >     >>
> >     >> Why reiserfs?  reiserfs is the bad guy, it doesen't support other
> >     >> architectures then intel and only the 32 bit part.
> > 
> >     Goswin> Doesn't reiser also have problems with raid and lvm?
> > 
> >  I spoke with a guy the other night who says he set up a reiserfs on a
> >  raid with lvm, iirc.  I'll try and have him put in here, if I can
> >  find his email and Cc him...
> > 
> >  Hey, Anthony?  What can you tell us about this?  Do you really know
> >  how to set up Reiserfs on RAID with lvm?

raid and lvm are different storries, although lvm can do striping.
I think reiser only had problems with raid5.

> For the woody installer it shouldnt be too difficult to handle reiser,
> lvm, raid, partition resizing etc.

A lot of places to change for the current dbootstrap. Trust me I
hunted them all down to get devfs working.

> As long as we have access to the module (or package) archive prior to
> creating the root filesystem we download whats required to make a raid
> partition, or reiserfs, and run it through a debconf menu to control its
> functionality.
> One possible problem is that the modules we have the more demanding we
> will be on ram size as its all in ramdisk.

Anyone who wants raid/lvm/other fancy stuff on his root partition
should have a bit more ram than lowmem users. Also note that lvm on 7
is not possible without initrd tricks (which is rather stupid of lvm).

> An alternative to the everything in ramdisk idea would be to setup a
> loopfs somewhere on a local disk. This would complicate partitioning as
> we would have to check and maybe move the loop filesystem to another
> partition if the loopf is residing on the partition to be worked on.

If all else fails, take some out of swap.
Is ramfs swapable? If so, just use that.


Reply to: