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

Re: Initrd or not ? (was: SOLVED: New kernel unable to mount/see a whole HD)

On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 02:45:26PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> J.F. Gratton wrote:
> > - I know my hardware, it's unlikely to change in a near-future; a new
> > kernel is more likely to come out thant my hardware to change; why using
> > an initrd then if I know exactly what needs to be put in modules and
> > must not ?
> This assumes a best case scenario that you will never need to get some
> new peice of hardware working at a time when taking the time out to set
> up a new kernel will be painful. No matter what percentage of time this
> best case scenario is true, it will never be true 100% of the time, and
> as time goes on the chances that it will fail to be true at some point
> approaches one. Some of the failure scenarios are very painful. After it
> has failed to be true a couple of times, people tend to switch over to
> modular kernels.

For Linux geeks as a class, there is a mean time to come to Joey's
understanding.  New geeks are born, like suckers, ever minute. So, no
matter how clear and compelling Joey's argument, there will always be
geeks who have not yet learned about it and are wasting time on
compiling non-initrd kernels.

Paul E Condon           

Reply to: