On Sun, 15 Jun 2025 at 19:10, Alexey Gladkov <leg...@kernel.org> wrote: >
> This is debatable because there might be something valuable on tmpfs which > is rootfs too, but I won't insist :) Correct and insting here is wasting your time AFAIK. Try to upstream your code here: https://github.com/NadavTasher/BusyBox > > I'm not very familiar with the busybox codebase. > Does this patch look acceptable ? Nope, but in this way it looks much better to me. @@ -244,8 +247,9 @@ int switch_root_main(int argc UNUSED_PARAM, char **argv) statfs("/", &stfs); // this never fails if ((unsigned)stfs.f_type != RAMFS_MAGIC && (unsigned)stfs.f_type != TMPFS_MAGIC ) { + /* whatever is the current standard, but non-default option anyway */ + #ifdef OVERLAYFS_MAGIC_MENU_OPTION + f ((unsigned)stfs.f_type != OVERLAYFS_MAGIC) + bb_simple_error_msg_and_die("root filesystem is not ramfs/tmpfs/overlayfs"); + else + #endif bb_simple_error_msg_and_die("root filesystem is not ramfs/tmpfs"); } if (!dry_run) { Best regards, R- _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net https://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
