Re: 2.6.13, experimental and 2.6.14-rc ...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:02:59 +0200
Sven Luther <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 05:28:27PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> > On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 09:24:17 +0200
> > Sven Luther <email@example.com> wrote:
> > > That was initramfs-tools, we should evaluate also yaird.
> > Is anyone (besides you, sven) interested in yaird at all?
> I suppose so, do you have an idea on what architectures it runs fine
> on, it would be especially interesting on those architectures where
> initramfs has trouble.
Yaird builds fine on all arches. I only have access to test booting
i386 and powerpc, so only know the status of those.
> > If not, why?
> I guess generic miscomprehension, or whatever. The fact that ubuntu
> uses initramfs-tools for example, and so on.
I would guess similarly. My interest was (and still is) actual concrete
reasons from those (if any) not interested.
Silence as response to both questions (from all but you and I) I dare
interpret as "we have already decided on initramfs-tools and are either
too lazy or too busy to even shed light on the issues we have with
> I think what would be of most interest is a technical description of
> both solutions, as well as a list of arches where it is known to
> work, should work, almost works, fails utterly.
It is not only arches, but also combinations of features:
With initrd-tools, running 2.4-x when installing a 2.6-x kernel causes
the tool to switch from "dep" to "most" because (I believe) it cannot
probe kernel module dependencies. Same situation will currently cause
yaird to fail completely,as it requires sysfs and udev support in the
The features - mount types and kernel command line options - supported
or planned by yaird is listed upstream here:
Generally, yaird has a minimalistic approach, wanting to include only
what is known to be needed - whereas it seems initrd-tools and
initramfs-tools both include all except what is known not to be needed.
> The fact that yaird doesn't use klibc seems to be a nice feature on
> those arches where klibc is still broken.
Another point is size: Do all of those arches with a working klibc
support the large initramfs'es generated currently by initramfs-tools?
And do I remember correctly that some tools in the initramfs using klibc
and others (like mdadm and lvm) using glibc can cause trouble?
> I believe the best solution is to leave the choice to the user, with
> a sane default depending on the arch/subarch used.
I agree. Similar to the choice of LILO or GRUB (or other bootloaders
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
- Enden er nær: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----