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

Re: [RFC] Updating boot loaders in lenny and squeeze

On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 08:50:27PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Wed, 2010-06-23 at 23:31 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:12:42AM -0400, Stephen Powell wrote:

>That does seem like a more general-purpose solution, rather than >having lilo and zipl treated as special cases. But please keep the >appropriate parties informed of any future design changes to >update-initramfs. I myself have never used yaird, but I assume that >to be consistent it should have a similar hook system.

A great while back initramfs-tools and kernel packages broke the ABI coordinated across initramfs-tools, linux-2.6, yaird and kernel-package.

Sure would be nice with a stable ABI again, and getting informed if it changes.

That is a separate issue. What we need here is an interface for the initramfs builder to update the boot loader if necessary. No such interface exists yet, AFAIK.

Agreed, this is a different ABI. The wish for such ABI being treated as a cross-package ABI still exist.

One approach would be to create a page at wiki.debian.org which all interested parties could then subscribe to.

I would dislike if (as in the past) we simply rely on whatever internal routines implemented by the most popular packages (initramfs-tools and minux-2.6) which others then need to track sources of.

I suggest something like the following:

1. Boot loaders that maintain block lists install a script under
/etc/mkinitramfs/post-update.d which takes two arguments: the kernel ABI
version (uname -r) and the absolute path to an initramfs.

2. Initramfs builders call the scripts in this directory after creating,
updating or deleting an initramfs by running:
   run-parts --verbose --exit-on-error --arg=$version --arg=$path /etc/mkinitramfs/post-update.d
or similar.

We could alternately use multiple directories or an argument to
distinguish creation, update and deletion.  However, I suspect that
these scripts will need to invoke the same command in all cases.

Seems reasonable to me.

 - Jonas

 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: