On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 00:34:10 -0700 Canek Peláez Valdés <can...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It basically removes the need for a "pesky init* thingy", although for > the life of me I cannot understand why someone will not see the > technical advantages of actually using an initramfs. I'll use your own opening comment as a reply: using != requiring The benefits of an initramfs are insufficient to *require* an initramfs. Now, we've been over this and thrashed it to death already. You had your say and the majority consensus around here is that we do not like it. DROP THIS SUBJECT. RIGHT NOW. PLEASE. -- Alan McKinnnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
