Re: 2.4.1: cramfs and initrd

[Arthur Korn <arthur@korn.ch>]

Glenn McGrath schrieb:
> Im thinking that iso9600 might be a good format for the initrd, because
> the initrd will be compressed anyway cramfs doesnt save us anything on
> the boot disk.
> 
> ISO9660 fs support adds less to the kernel size than any other fs.

But isofs is read only, and we might need to write to the initrd
(at least if we want to allow installation with all-LVM, which
would be pretty nifty).

ciao, 2ri
-- 
In einer GUI stehen 1280x1024 Pixel dagegen dass du triffst, in
einer Shell gibt es nur 104 Tasten...