yes i use / on LVM. i just cannot understand why the busybox in the initramfs that genkernel generates works fine, while mine reports error.
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckin...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Monday 07 December 2009 03:00:29 Xi Shen wrote: >> yes, i installed busybox into the initramfs i created my self. because >> i see the initramfs generated by genkernel uses it. >> >> i am using LVM, so i have to use a initramfs. are you suggesting that >> i should install all the GNU utilities into the initramfs? i think >> that would create a very large initramfs file. > > Do you mean / on LVM? > > Personally, I don't trust busybox on full scale installs, or on anything > that's not embedded. Busybox necessarily omits certain features to keep the > size and simplicity down whereas boot utilities are too often written for GNU > tools. > > > >> >> On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 4:42 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckin...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> > On Friday 04 December 2009 17:25:21 Alex Schuster wrote: >> >> Xi Shen writes: >> >> > when i boot my system, at the step "Wiping /tmp", it pops up an error >> >> > message saying that the find command do not support the '-uid' option. >> >> > in the error message, i also see the busybox mark. it looks like it >> >> > used the wrong find command. >> >> >> >> Did you emerge busybox with the make-symlinks USE flag? When your >> >> original find is replaced by a link to busybox. >> > >> > That's unlikely. His box will likely not boot if he did that. If it does >> > boot it certainly will not emerge anything. Portage relies on features >> > that are present in GNU utilities and are not there in busybox >> > >> >> Don't know what to do exactly, most probably many other commands will >> >> also not work as expected, I guess you need to re-emerge all stuff that >> >> provides them, like findutils. There was a thread recently, look for >> >> "/bin contains busybox executables after installing busybox-1.13.2" by >> >> Amit Dor- Shifer on 2009-11-25. >> > >> > He likely installed busybox into the initramfs instead of GNU utilities. >> > >> > initramfs on gentoo is not a technique I recommend. It is designed for a >> > general use-case not present in Gentoo[1], and a very few specific cases >> > where an initramfs-less setup cannot work[2[ >> > >> > [1] Binary distros cannot know upfront what the end-user has >> > hardware-wise, so cannot build drivers for everything imaginable into the >> > kernel. An initramfs is an elegant solution, but one which is overkill >> > for Gentoo (the initial statement is usually false) >> > >> > [2] Some specific boot scenarios require an initramfs even on Gentoo - >> > booting off raided volumes where drivers are needed at boot time, >> > encrypted / volumes, / on an LVM volume and a few others >> > >> > In almost all other cases it is simpler and easier to dispense with the >> > initramfs and build two drivers into the kernel. After all, the user in >> > all probability knows exactly what hardware they have >> > >> > >> > -- >> > alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com >> > > -- > alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com > > -- Best Regards, David Shen http://twitter.com/davidshen84/ http://meme.yahoo.com/davidshen84/
