>>>>> Reinhard Tartler <siret...@debian.org> writes: >>>>> On Mi, Okt 12, 2011 at 06:09:00 (CEST), Ivan Shmakov wrote:
[…] > AFAIUI Harald (the fedora maintainer for their initramfs tool > dracut), he dislikes having a separate set of tools in /usr and the > initramfs, i.e., he strongly favors putting glibc, bash, iproute and > similar utilities directly in the initramfs. The main motivation > (again AFAIUI) seems to be behavioral consistency of tools between > early userspace and the booted system. Well, in the light of this, the original proposal now makes some sense. Indeed, they've made their initramfs their new /, and now wonder why would they need two /? Quite a sensible question, as it seems. Still, I don't think that it's applicable at all to Debian. > On the other hand, Debian has chosen against that and relies on > klibc, ipconfig, etc. for early userspace and thus, the initramfs. I > suspect the main motivations behind these decisions were portability > and size (please correct me and add references). If anything, I'd vote for the Debian way. And, I guess that makes Debian's initramfs and the system itself less interdependent, to the point that one could boot a system with a (kernel, initramfs) combination that's several revisions behind (or ahead) of the system proper. > I imagine it would be pretty challenging to improve the klibc based > tools to become feature-par and sufficiently behaviorally consistent > with their glibc based equivalents. In any case, I think having this > in mind is relevant for deciding whether the various fsck(8) > utilities can or should go into the initramfs or not. I believe that should fsck(8) be moved to initramfs, there would essentially be no reason to keep the rest of the «big stuff» off the latter. […] -- FSF associate member #7257 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/86y5wqzk1i....@gray.siamics.net