On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 01:06:50PM +0900, Horms wrote: > On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 11:46:18PM -0400, Jeff Bailey wrote: > > Le lundi 03 octobre 2005 à 18:01 +0900, Horms a écrit : > > > > > > > What is the status of replacing initrd. Do we actually have a solution > > > that works across a wide range of architectres? Wide enough for > > > an upload to experimental? Wide enough for unstable and testing? > > > > > > initramfs-tools is test on i386, ppc, amd64, and sparc. ia64 are having > > issues that I will start tracking again when Breezy releases (I've just > > run out of time for now), but both appear to be solvable. > > > > On i64, the inflate code misreads the magic number, I suspect that > > get_byte is behaving poorly. > > > > On hppa, I am getting a segfault in run_init and an lseek error in > > fstype. It's probably something simple like a register that needs to be > > setup. > > > > I have not tested on mips, mipsel, arm, m68k, s390 or sh. klibc failed > > on mips and mipsel, which isn't promising. It compiled on s390 which is > > surprising. > > > > We have a workaround for the compile error for sparc. > > > > The ports that I listed as known-working above are using initramfs-tools > > for the Breezy release. So I generally *hope* they're well enough > > tested. I'll let you know in a week ;) > > Thanks for the update, and good luck with Breezy :-) > > It sounds more and more to me that experimental would be a good place > for 2.6.13 for now.
That was initramfs-tools, we should evaluate also yaird. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
