On 17 December 2014 at 21:03, Peter Maydell <[email protected]> wrote: > On 17 December 2014 at 19:50, Richard W.M. Jones <[email protected]> wrote: >> I agree with Peter here, although -kernel w/o -initrd really is a >> developer option :-) Even qemu-sanity-check which is a program I >> wrote[1] that has probably the most minimal userspace that it's >> possible for Linux to have, still uses the -initrd option. > > Well, if you're going for minimalism you probably want -initrd > but no actual root filesystem disk image. You can have as > complicated a userspace as you like with a no-initrd config, > you just need to have enough compiled into the kernel for it > to boot and mount the rootfs... (You can even have modules > if you like, though I tend to disable that kernel option too > for dev boards.) >
Also, initrd/initramfs could legally be part of the (z)Image, which in itself could be a convenient way in a Secure Boot scenario to get the initrd payload covered by the PE/COFF signature. So 'no initrd' should definitely be supported IMO -- Ard. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration & more Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=164703151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/edk2-devel
