On Thu, 08 Dec 2011, Marco d'Itri wrote: > > There are quite good reasons why you wouldn't want to do thing that > > way though. We should at least do our best not to make things > > unreasonably difficult for people in this situation, even if we chose > > not to really 'support' it. > We need to understand if these people object to using an initramfs in > principle or just to the ones generated by initramfs-tools.
The real nastyness of initramfs-like stuff is that it _will_ cause grief if you fail to update it when you edit /etc/fstab, mdadm / lvm / device-mapper config, etc in some configs. It is also slower. initramfs-tools is rather good at what it does, I doubt it is the problem. That doesn't mean there is not anything to improve in our helpers (and therefore in the initramfs itself), and initramfs-tools could use better documentation last time I checked (a few months ago). -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- 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/20111209220633.ga25...@khazad-dum.debian.net
