Olivier Crête posted on Thu, 05 Jan 2012 09:31:07 -0500 as excerpted: > On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 12:08 +0100, Marc Schiffbauer wrote: >> >> I meant "hight-level" only in a way that it is not really needed to >> boot the very basic things of a system so that I can get a root prompt >> at the console at least. E.g. you do not need dbus to find and mount >> the rootfs, fire a getty and shell. > > Obviously, you can do init=/bin/sh, that's doesn't help you much. I > think we're all speaking of a minimally useful system here.
But init=/bin/sh (or /bin/bash as I use here) DOES help in a surprising number of cases as long as the necessary storage and input drivers and filesystem modules are builtin. And a lot of us have strong ideas about wanting to keep it that way, being able to use init=/bin/sh on the kernel command line itself, from grub or whatever. Some of us even tried lvm and dumped it for precisely that reason: it requires userspace and thus an initr* if root is on lvm, and without an lvm managing root, its usefulness is diminished to the point where it's more trouble than it's worth, especially since md/raid has handled partitioned RAID very well for quite some time now (a big use case for lvm originally, since md/raid didn't handle partitioned mds directly, back in the day), AND unlike lvm, it can be configured on the kernel command line directly, allowing one to actually get to that init=/bin/sh if necessary. That's low level. Tell me when init=/usr/bin/dbus-whatever works from the kernel command line. Until then, system-bus or no-system-bus, it's not even in the same ball park, or even on the same planet, come to think of it, level-wise. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
