[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1204832781.6241.269.camel@lappy>
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 20:46:21 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Chris Wedgwood <cw@...f.org>,
Pawel Plociennik <paplociennik@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.24] chroot= as a new kernel parameter
On Thu, 2008-03-06 at 12:53 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Thu 2008-03-06 12:37:29, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Chris Wedgwood <cw@...f.org> wrote:
> >
> > > > But given an existing initrd (which might have come from the distro,
> > > > etc.) i prefer adding boot options instead of modifying the initrd.
> > >
> > > I assume this is so you have have /distro1 /distro2 and use your boot
> > > option to (help) select which one you boot into?
> >
> > while i have no personal use for chroot=, i generally test distros that
> > way, yes - and i try to keep them as unmodified as possible.
> >
> > "Use the initrd as an extended boot commandline" is a poor answer IMO.
> >
> > _Everything_ we do on the boot commandline that affects user-space can
> > be done in an initrd in theory - but still we have hundreds of boot
> > options.
>
> Yes, please. chroot= is useful, nonintrusive, and it just should be there.
As much as I hate initrd, and all features building dependencies on it,
I don't see the need for either initrd or kernel support for chroot= as
it can be trivially done using a slightly longer init=.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists