Yes, but isn't initrd slow to copy from the boot media (caches off, simple byte by byte copy)?
Dave On 21 Jan 2011, at 16:27, Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> wrote: > On Friday 21 January 2011 16:50:37 Jamie Bennett wrote: >>> Could we do with an initrd instead of an image? I mean, busybox + >>> small set of tools is probably enough for validation, and will be quite >>> small. >>> >>> There is inherent bloat as soon as we add a package manager in the mix >> >> Right, current thoughts after some IRC discussion are: >> >> * busybox >> * no package manager >> * max size of 30mb (without kernel) >> * some further removal of packages >> >> I think with this in place you will get a ~30mb compress rootfs, we >> could even go further if necessary. > > Sounds good, but that does not answer the question of whether it should > be an initrd, a file system image, or both. > > I think having something available as an initrd image, or at least > an option for this, would be extremely valuable because it lets you > netboot the kernel+image without the need for NFS or for physically > installing the image on the target system. > > Arnd > > _______________________________________________ > linaro-dev mailing list > linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org > http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
