On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 12:46:04AM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
The minimal initramfs would do the following.
1. Mount devtmpfs/sysfs/procfs as needed to access devices.
2. Mount real_root to /newroot
3. Read /newroot/etc/initramfs.mount and /newroot/etc/fstab
4.1. If
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:49:38AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 12:46:04AM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
The minimal initramfs would do the following.
1. Mount devtmpfs/sysfs/procfs as needed to access devices.
2. Mount real_root to /newroot
3. Read
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:49:38AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
I am concerned about /var being included in this because of the
potential of filling up the root partition.
Err, I don't follow. How does mounting /var fill up the root partition?
If you
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 03:47:18PM -0500, Dale wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:49:38AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
I am concerned about /var being included in this because of the
potential of filling up the root partition.
Err, I don't follow. How does mounting /var fill up the root
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 08:02:44PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:49:38AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
I am concerned about /var being included in this because of the
potential of filling up the root partition.
Err, I don't follow. How does mounting /var fill up the
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 03:47:18PM -0500, Dale wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:49:38AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
I am concerned about /var being included in this because of the
potential of filling up the root partition.
Err, I don't follow.
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 04:42:04PM -0500, Dale wrote:
For the record, I think /usr should work on a separate partition as
well.
You're entirely missing the point of this thread.
One reason, I would like to use LVM on all but my / file system.
This is something I been fiddling with for a
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 03:57:30PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
Sorry, I should have been more clear here. Mounting /var doesn't fill up
the root partition, but if you don't want to use the initramfs, this
means that /var must also exist on the root partition, which can create
more of a concern
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
The final solution in this thread:
TL;DR version: If your /usr is NOT on /, you MUST use an initramfs.
More detailed:
1. If you want /usr or /var on separate partitions (not LVM or anything
elsewhere userspace action is required to make the block devices
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10-08-2011 21:56, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 03:57:30PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
Sorry, I should have been more clear here. Mounting /var doesn't
fill up the root partition, but if you don't want to use the
initramfs,
On 2011-08-11 12:56 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
The problem of filling up
/ is PEBKAC primarily, and can happen equally for / (think /root), /usr
on /, /var on /.
This does not match with my experience. Over the years, I have seen
/var filling up several times on servers, but not /. Please
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 07:42:29PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 10:06:48PM +0200, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
That said, I'm a bit hesitant to describing that we recommend it
regardless of the situation. What is wrong with describing when? At least
inform our users that the
* Samuli Suominen schrieb am 05.08.11 um 15:43 Uhr:
On 08/05/2011 04:12 PM, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
OTOH the initrd that Robin described would be a very static solution
with almost no dependencies, so if genkernel had a USE flag like
dracut it would be possible to build it without dracut
On Sat, 6 Aug 2011 17:52:54 +0200
Marc Schiffbauer msch...@gentoo.org wrote:
Then yes, such minimal initramfs should propably be covered in the
embedded's documentation, but otherwise trying to avoid dracut is
reinventing the wheel...
You may be right, but to my understanding such a
On 6 August 2011 20:52, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
Then yes, such minimal initramfs should propably be covered in the
embedded's documentation, but otherwise trying to avoid dracut is
reinventing the wheel...
You may be right, but to my understanding such a minimalistic
* Robin H. Johnson schrieb am 05.08.11 um 02:46 Uhr:
[...]
That leaves the only reasonable solution as #2. In terms of minimal
impact, I propose that we offer users with a static system an absolutely
minimal initramfs, that _just_ mounts the required directories. No
modules, no LVM, no MD, no
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Marc Schiffbauer msch...@gentoo.org wrote:
* Robin H. Johnson schrieb am 05.08.11 um 02:46 Uhr:
[...]
That leaves the only reasonable solution as #2. In terms of minimal
impact, I propose that we offer users with a static system an absolutely
minimal initramfs,
* Rich Freeman schrieb am 05.08.11 um 14:42 Uhr:
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Marc Schiffbauer msch...@gentoo.org wrote:
* Robin H. Johnson schrieb am 05.08.11 um 02:46 Uhr:
[...]
That leaves the only reasonable solution as #2. In terms of minimal
impact, I propose that we offer users
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 7:42 AM, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Marc Schiffbauer msch...@gentoo.org wrote:
* Robin H. Johnson schrieb am 05.08.11 um 02:46 Uhr:
[...]
That leaves the only reasonable solution as #2. In terms of minimal
impact, I propose that
On 08/05/2011 04:12 PM, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
* Rich Freeman schrieb am 05.08.11 um 14:42 Uhr:
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Marc Schiffbauer msch...@gentoo.org wrote:
* Robin H. Johnson schrieb am 05.08.11 um 02:46 Uhr:
[...]
That leaves the only reasonable solution as #2. In terms of
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Matthew Summers
quantumsumm...@gentoo.org wrote:
In point of fact all modern Linux kernels have an initramfs built in
now, that when empty is effectively bypassed, so there is no wheel
reinvention. To quote the docs [1]
Yes, but that embedded initramfs doesn't
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 08:25:19AM -0500, Matthew Summers wrote:
This, at least to me, seems like an excellent opportunity to nicely
document what can be done with an initramfs (in basic and advanced
forms, as there are some really fancy things one can do with
initramfs's), and how Gentoo is
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 09:57:08AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
In any case, as long as a solution exists for md+lvm+luks+/usr before
we start breaking more stuff than is already broken, then we should be
fine. Having more than one optional solution is fine. While I don't
think that gentoo
Hi,
my knowledge of booting from an initramfs is limited right now, so keep
that in mind. However, I will attempt to answer some of your questions.
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 10:06:48PM +0200, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
I'm all in favor of documenting what an initramfs does (or at least what it
is
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 8:42 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 10:06:48PM +0200, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
How does the tool that creates an initramfs know which files to copy from
/usr and /var anyhow?
My understanding is that nothing gets copied from /usr and
Hi Rich,
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 09:04:50PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 8:42 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 10:06:48PM +0200, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
How does the tool that creates an initramfs know which files to copy from
/usr and
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 10:37 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote:
Hi Rich,
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 09:04:50PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 8:42 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 10:06:48PM +0200, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
How does
I've mainly said out of this discussion until now, because I've been
quite busy.
The root problem here is that there are starting to be a lot of cases
where rule run by udev require that /usr [1] and potentially /var [2] or
more are available when the udev rule runs.
To the best of my knowledge,
28 matches
Mail list logo
