On Sunday 29 January 2012 07:05:17 pm Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Baho Utot wrote: > > Am I correct in believeing that the root filesystem is mounted from > > the /etc/rc./init.d/mountfs script? > > No. It must be mounted in the initramfs or the kernel itself, usually > readonly.
That is working in the initramfs and it does get mounted rw afterwards > > > If so is it permissable to remove the part that mounts the root > > filesystem? > > > > Does LFS have to have the root file system in fstab? > > I think it does, but I haven't started developing lvm for BLFS yet. > What I will do though is to get lvm working as a non-rootfs system first > and then work on initramfs for use as a rootfs. > > As a comment, I don't really think having the root file system on LVM is > useful. For me it is ever try to manage 16 regular partitions? If it wasn't for 2TB hard drives I would agree with you but with the large drives lvm is just more better. You can make a 5G partition and expand or contect it at will, to do that with regular partitions is almost impossible when you get more than 8 regular partitions and you need to shrink or expand the one in the middle. Since I started using lvm and got past the training part I use lvm on all my systems. > The really large systems are in places like /home or other > customized places. A simple 10G (a trivial size for today's drives) > partition will take all of / with ease. The larger partitions that may > need lvm can be mounted as a part of the booting process. > > The only purpose of an initramfs is to mount the rootfs. Unless you > need to do a network mount for a diskless system, it is unnecessary. > Yes, it's required for lvm > All the big distros use an initramfs, but that's because they have a > 'one size fits all' mentality. That's why we do LFS in the first place. > > Sorry for the rant. That's OK, I do that too. > > -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
