>I'm not subscribed, so sorry if this doesn't fall into the original
>thread. I'm curious as to why the kernel has to include the decoder -
>why you can't just run a self-extracting executable in an empty
>initramfs (with a preset capacity if needs be).
The kernel already includes gunz
On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 12:06:47PM -0700, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 09:39:15PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Wouldn't it be better to put overmount_rootfs in initramfs.c
> > and call it only if there's a initramfs?
>
> I don't see what or how that helps. Yes we can
On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 01:22:26PM -0700, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 08:08:51PM +0000, Kent Robotti wrote:
>
> > Overmount_rootfs shouldn't take place until you know for sure the
> > kernel detects an initramfs.
>
> Actually, it was a d
On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 05:40:45PM -0700, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 09:12:31PM +0000, Kent Robotti wrote:
>
> > Ideally, I don't know why you would want to overmount unless the
> > kernel detects an initramfs.
>
> because the rootfs doesn
On Fri Aug 26 2005 - 05:33:43 EST, Erik Mouw wrote:
> I prefer tar because I have more experience with it, and it works.
>> The kernel people prefer cpio because they have experience with it, it
>> doesn't need too much code, and it works.
I know that experience dosen't come from pa
On Sat, Aug 27, 2005 at 02:28:17PM -0700, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> How about you do a little research on some things for a bit? The
> initramfs code is done the way it is for a good reason. cpio is used
> over tar for another good reason.
Why don't you do some research on manners?
> You are mos
6 matches
Mail list logo
