> -----Original Message----- > From: Rob van der Heij [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 12:48 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Kernel patch to add VM IPL PARM support > > > Lucius, Leland wrote: > > So, which should it be? Append or prepend the PARMs to the > command line? I > > haven't looked too deeply, but it appears that processing > kernel parameters > > isn't too consistent and some rtns take the first parameter > encountered. As > > it is, appending PARMs wouldn't allow you to override in > those situations. > > A similar implementation was published in the ISP/ASP > redbook. So far I have > failed in trying to get our friends in Boeblingen to take the > code I offered. That's a bummer. A shame they aren't more open to "user contributed" patches.
> I can justify spending some type in protoyping code, but if > it does not make > it into the official sources it is a burden to support it > My take on this is a tad different. Since we will be using the patch, I don't have a problem with maintaining it. Not much different than the usermods we maintain on our OS/390 LPARs. But, I will only maintain a version that fits our needs. Since the patch is/will be made available to anyone, then it would be a simple matter for "anyone" to modify it to suit their needs. > We've argued also about the order of the parameters. In our > case the rest of > the options is in the NSS, and in real life it turns out we > mainly needed it > to specify the root= (which takes the last one) and to > specify a few more disk > devices (takes them all in the order specified). Also the > option to suppress > the DEVFS mount came in handy (when you forget to disable it > in the kernel). > But the main thing remains the simplicity to save the NSS. > My guess is that appending would be quite satisfactory, but it won't be difficult to allow both prefixing and suffixing. Leland
