Hello!
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 07:53:16PM +0100, Hubert Mantel wrote:
> > initrd, and thus at the bottom of the list. Strange enough SuSE compile
> > MSDOS which hardly anyone needs at boot time into the kernel, but not
> > reiserfs (admittedly, reiserfs takes up some memory, but then, it's a
> FAT is needed in order to access some modules floppy disk at installation
> time. Due to space reasons, our initrd also is using FAT format now.
Why not use cramfs? It would generate smaller initrd, because it compresses files.
> You need _some_ filesystem in the kernel. We chose the one that needs
> least space and allows people to easily put additional modules onto some
vfat 9872 0 (unused)
fat 32000 0 [vfat]
cramfs 37424 0 (unused)
So it is 41k for vfat, or 37k for cramfs.
crams if more space-efficient.
> floppy (some people have problems mounting an ext2/minix floppy under
> Windows or DOS).
There is no problems in loading vfat from e.g. initrd. And then to ask people to insert
"additional driver disk" which would hold FAT fs on it.
RedHat use minix for initrd, AFAIK. And minix fs support contains less code, too:
minix 21616 0 (unused)
> > Had they left MSDOS as a module, things would have worked out: 1. ext2
> > in the kernel 2. initrd loads reiserfs 3. actual root (reiserfs) is
> > mounted 4. only now, msdos.o becomes available.
> And which format should we use for the modules disk and for the initrd? We
I believe cramfs is much better than vfat for you.
> used to have ext2 in the past. It caused problems for other people.
Which problems?
Bye,
Oleg
