linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] docs: replace broken links in ramfs-rootfs-initramfs docs

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <f72d1739-8c3d-4bc8-a26d-8f03b3aecf15@infradead.org>
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2025 15:20:41 -0700
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To: Nadav Tasher <tashernadav@...il.com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: corbet@....net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: replace broken links in ramfs-rootfs-initramfs docs



On 10/25/25 10:16 AM, Nadav Tasher wrote:
> http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/ doesn't seem to exist anymore.
> I managed to find backups on archive.org, which helped me find
> the right links on https://lore.kernel.org/.
> 
> http://freecode.com/projects/afio was also down, so I figured
> it could be replaced with https://linux.die.net/man/1/afio.
> 
> Replace broken links to mailing list and aifo tool.

                                           afio

> Signed-off-by: Nadav Tasher <tashernadav@...il.com>

Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Tested-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>

> ---
>  Documentation/filesystems/ramfs-rootfs-initramfs.rst | 12 ++++++------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/ramfs-rootfs-initramfs.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/ramfs-rootfs-initramfs.rst
> index fa4f81099cb4..a9d271e171c3 100644
> --- a/Documentation/filesystems/ramfs-rootfs-initramfs.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/ramfs-rootfs-initramfs.rst
> @@ -290,11 +290,11 @@ Why cpio rather than tar?
>  
>  This decision was made back in December, 2001.  The discussion started here:
>  
> -  http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0112.2/1538.html
> +- https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/a03cke$640$1@cesium.transmeta.com/
>  
>  And spawned a second thread (specifically on tar vs cpio), starting here:
>  
> -  http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0112.2/1587.html
> +- https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/3C25A06D.7030408@zytor.com/
>  
>  The quick and dirty summary version (which is no substitute for reading
>  the above threads) is:
> @@ -310,7 +310,7 @@ the above threads) is:
>     either way about the archive format, and there are alternative tools,
>     such as:
>  
> -     http://freecode.com/projects/afio
> +      https://linux.die.net/man/1/afio
>  
>  2) The cpio archive format chosen by the kernel is simpler and cleaner (and
>     thus easier to create and parse) than any of the (literally dozens of)
> @@ -331,12 +331,12 @@ the above threads) is:
>  5) Al Viro made the decision (quote: "tar is ugly as hell and not going to be
>     supported on the kernel side"):
>  
> -      http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0112.2/1540.html
> +    - https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/Pine.GSO.4.21.0112222109050.21702-100000@weyl.math.psu.edu/
>  
>     explained his reasoning:
>  
> -     - http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0112.2/1550.html
> -     - http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0112.2/1638.html
> +    - https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/Pine.GSO.4.21.0112222240530.21702-100000@weyl.math.psu.edu/
> +    - https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/Pine.GSO.4.21.0112230849550.23300-100000@weyl.math.psu.edu/
>  
>     and, most importantly, designed and implemented the initramfs code.
>  

-- 
~Randy