On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 12:26:09PM +0200, FRIGN wrote: > On Wed, 16 Apr 2014 23:10:23 +0100 > Dimitris Papastamos <d...@spl9.org> wrote: > > > > i just note that pivot_root is a linux system call > > > so implementing that tool is a one-liner in c > > We don't need this here, given we don't give a damn about preserving > the initramfs somewhere. > I would agree on using syscalls to avoid long hacks and system-specific > behaviour, but wiping / and mounting something over it is trivial. > Besides, I often made the experience that syscalls can turn out to be > very complex and intransparent. > It may be a one-liner in C, but who knows what happens behind closed > doors?
http://git.suckless.org/ubase/tree/pivot_root.c I am pretty sure you've seen this, but this is our implementation. It is very trivial. > > We already have pivot_root in ubase. Markus is basically asking > > why we implemented switch_root in C instead of in sh (as demonstrated > > in his e-mail). > > Well, sh doesn't work when you don't have a shell on your initrd (like > I do), but you already explained that to him afaik. > However, I think Markus just sketched the functionality in sh and > implied it to be implemented in C regardless. But, you implemented it :) In any case as already mentioned, ubase-box breaks if we add shell scripts to ubase and this cannot be fixed. Someome might suggest adding some useful shell scripts in a directory misc/ or so in ubase but that's not the right place and I'd like to keep sbase and ubase free of non-C code and external runtime dependencies.
