On 31/05/2024 00.08, Linus Heckemann wrote:
> I was having a look at this again, and I'm not sure reimplementing the
> kernel command line parsing logic[1][2] is really desirable.
FWIW, I'm with Linus. It's also odd for busybox to have a check that the
util-linux version of this doesn't.
For
Kang-Che Sung writes:
> Linus Heckemann 於 2024年4月23日 星期二寫道：
>>
>> I don't really see the existence of /init being so critical for
>> this check given that we check below that it's a ramfs or tmpfs, which
>> seems to me to be enough that people won't be destroying filesystems
>> they cared a
Linus Heckemann 於 2024年4月23日 星期二寫道：
>
> I don't really see the existence of /init being so critical for
> this check given that we check below that it's a ramfs or tmpfs, which
> seems to me to be enough that people won't be destroying filesystems
> they cared a great deal about.
>
The
Kang-Che Sung writes:
> Linus Heckemann 於 2024年4月19日 星期五寫道：
>> We were having some difficulty switching out of our custom initramfs
>> into the final filesystem, with the error "message '/init' is not a
>> regular file". We were confused as to why it was looking for `/init`
>> -- we didn't have
Linus Heckemann 於 2024年4月19日 星期五寫道：
> We were having some difficulty switching out of our custom initramfs
> into the final filesystem, with the error "message '/init' is not a
> regular file". We were confused as to why it was looking for `/init`
> -- we didn't have `/init`, neither in our
