Aaron Griffin wrote: > On 3/2/06, Dimitrios Apostolou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>My primary concern is that necessary modules should be autoloaded by >>default. Since module autoloading is enabled in the kernel insmod should >>be redundant for any of them. I have two theories: >>1) Modules can't be autoloaded with a static /dev so we need udev in the >>initrd too. However, I'm pretty sure I remember module autoloading was >>doable in the old days too, with a static /dev. >>2) The modprobe utility is missing from the initrd, so module >>autoloading can't happen. > > > There are alot of reasons for all this stuff, however, before I go > that way, let me ask what you're trying to accomplish: > Yes, you want less modules loaded. We get that - that is the reason > for this page: > http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Initrd > > Autoloading can be done, and it's probably preferrable, but at this > point in time, it might not be the best move - udev and modprobe in > the initrd image will (a) require alot of testing and (b) require > glibc out of the box (or possibly static compiles, or uClibc) - either > way, it's alot of stuff that would require much testing.
I see now, thank you for your thourough answer. Academically speaking, do you think that by only statically compiling modprobe (while keeping the static /dev) and inserting it in the initrd would work? > > In the near future, klibc will be integrated with the kernel, making > the initrd redundant. I have been, off-and-on, doing some initramfs > testing with klibc. Module autoloading and all the stuff you speak of > is almost trivial when using kinit. The only thing holding me back is > the fact that kinit is rather young, and just recently added support > for raid devices, so I'm letting it mature. Hmmm, I don't have a clue about klibc/kinit. I'd better google a bit... > > I do have a plan in mind, I am just waiting on things outside of my > control. When klibc/kinit become a bit more mature, I will experiment > a tad more on a wider breadth of hardware. > > For now, though, I would recommend following the wiki. You will > achieve exactly what you want without massive changes to the initrd > process which may be going away in the near future. Actually I had this problem solved before by fine-tuning myself the initrd. I just wanted sometime to post my questions, since I couldn't exactly understand the situation. Thanks for explaining the situation, Dimitris _______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
