On Sunday 09 January 2005 08:53 pm, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: > On Sun, 9 Jan 2005, Rob Landley wrote: > > I wonder if that old hack (deleting the file signalling there's no rush > > about writing stuff back to the disk anymore, although it's still your > > backing store) still works? > > Probably not.
Might be worth a shot, though. (If I delete the file from userspace after launching UML, will it screw up anything?) > > I'm more interested in correctness than performance at the moment. As > > long as it WORKS, they can leave it running overnight for now... > > Just to give you alternatives, an alternative to UML is to use a emulator > such as qemu. Personally I prefer UML, but using an emulator eleminates > the need of the user to even have Linux to start with as the same image > also works on Windows. Yeah, I thought about that. Higher memory requirements, higher disk usage (need to feed it a partition or loopback file or something, not a shared directory like hostfs -- my high water mark of disk usage during the build is just under 370 megabytes, but I really don't want to have to depend on knowing that), dog slow, I'd need to build the kernel twice anyway (once on the parent system to have something for the emulator to run and once with the final system), more source code in the tarball, harder to integrate into the existing build process (with UML I can fire up a child that runs a script that can shutdown at the end so the parent script continues)... It's an option. I'd much rather figure out how to get UML to work... > Regards > Henrik Rob ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel
