Re: [arch-dev-public] [mkinitcpio][RFC] a better fallback image?
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 11:21 PM, Tom Gundersen <teg@jklm.no> wrote:
It seems to me that a more useful fallback image, would be one that is generated at compile-time, rather than at install-time, and shipped as a part of the kernel package. This would avoid user errors, and mkinitcpio run-time problems.
This fallback image should contain the widest sets of hooks and modules so that it should work on any hardware and any setup (at least to the extent possible with our current hooks).
I put a PKGBUILD up on AUR[0]. Rather than making it part of the kernel package, I made it separate (at Thomas' request). At least this should make it easy to test without having to rebuild kernels. At the moment it simply includes all the hooks I could think of. If, in the future, we would like to add more features to it (e.g. pacman, arch-install-scripts or better networking tools), we should add mkinitcpio hooks to the relevant pacakges. Any thoughts? Cheers, Tom [0]: <https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=61313>
Am 30.07.2012 00:18, schrieb Tom Gundersen:
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 11:21 PM, Tom Gundersen <teg@jklm.no> wrote:
It seems to me that a more useful fallback image, would be one that is generated at compile-time, rather than at install-time, and shipped as a part of the kernel package. This would avoid user errors, and mkinitcpio run-time problems.
This fallback image should contain the widest sets of hooks and modules so that it should work on any hardware and any setup (at least to the extent possible with our current hooks).
I put a PKGBUILD up on AUR[0]. Rather than making it part of the kernel package, I made it separate (at Thomas' request). At least this should make it easy to test without having to rebuild kernels.
At the moment it simply includes all the hooks I could think of. If, in the future, we would like to add more features to it (e.g. pacman, arch-install-scripts or better networking tools), we should add mkinitcpio hooks to the relevant pacakges.
Any thoughts?
Cheers,
Tom
It'll be better to make it a split of the linux package to make sure modules are compatible. -- Pierre Schmitz, https://pierre-schmitz.com
Am 30.07.2012 11:55, schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
Am 30.07.2012 00:18, schrieb Tom Gundersen:
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 11:21 PM, Tom Gundersen <teg@jklm.no> wrote:
It seems to me that a more useful fallback image, would be one that is generated at compile-time, rather than at install-time, and shipped as a part of the kernel package. This would avoid user errors, and mkinitcpio run-time problems.
This fallback image should contain the widest sets of hooks and modules so that it should work on any hardware and any setup (at least to the extent possible with our current hooks). I put a PKGBUILD up on AUR[0]. Rather than making it part of the kernel package, I made it separate (at Thomas' request). At least this should make it easy to test without having to rebuild kernels.
At the moment it simply includes all the hooks I could think of. If, in the future, we would like to add more features to it (e.g. pacman, arch-install-scripts or better networking tools), we should add mkinitcpio hooks to the relevant pacakges.
Any thoughts?
Cheers,
Tom
[0]: <https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=61313> It'll be better to make it a split of the linux package to make sure modules are compatible.
As far as I understand covers it everything so no need to be compatible with the installed kernel. greetingst tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa@archlinux.org
Am 30.07.2012 12:03, schrieb Tobias Powalowski:
Am 30.07.2012 11:55, schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
Am 30.07.2012 00:18, schrieb Tom Gundersen:
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 11:21 PM, Tom Gundersen <teg@jklm.no> wrote:
It seems to me that a more useful fallback image, would be one that is generated at compile-time, rather than at install-time, and shipped as a part of the kernel package. This would avoid user errors, and mkinitcpio run-time problems.
This fallback image should contain the widest sets of hooks and modules so that it should work on any hardware and any setup (at least to the extent possible with our current hooks). I put a PKGBUILD up on AUR[0]. Rather than making it part of the kernel package, I made it separate (at Thomas' request). At least this should make it easy to test without having to rebuild kernels.
At the moment it simply includes all the hooks I could think of. If, in the future, we would like to add more features to it (e.g. pacman, arch-install-scripts or better networking tools), we should add mkinitcpio hooks to the relevant pacakges.
Any thoughts?
Cheers,
Tom
[0]: <https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=61313> It'll be better to make it a split of the linux package to make sure modules are compatible.
As far as I understand covers it everything so no need to be compatible with the installed kernel. greetingst tpowa
Except it does not include the kernel itself. Modules without a matching kernel are not that useful. -- Pierre Schmitz, https://pierre-schmitz.com
Am 30.07.2012 12:09, schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
Am 30.07.2012 12:03, schrieb Tobias Powalowski:
Am 30.07.2012 11:55, schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
Am 30.07.2012 00:18, schrieb Tom Gundersen:
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 11:21 PM, Tom Gundersen <teg@jklm.no> wrote:
It seems to me that a more useful fallback image, would be one that is generated at compile-time, rather than at install-time, and shipped as a part of the kernel package. This would avoid user errors, and mkinitcpio run-time problems.
This fallback image should contain the widest sets of hooks and modules so that it should work on any hardware and any setup (at least to the extent possible with our current hooks). I put a PKGBUILD up on AUR[0]. Rather than making it part of the kernel package, I made it separate (at Thomas' request). At least this should make it easy to test without having to rebuild kernels.
At the moment it simply includes all the hooks I could think of. If, in the future, we would like to add more features to it (e.g. pacman, arch-install-scripts or better networking tools), we should add mkinitcpio hooks to the relevant pacakges.
Any thoughts?
Cheers,
Tom
[0]: <https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=61313> It'll be better to make it a split of the linux package to make sure modules are compatible.
As far as I understand covers it everything so no need to be compatible with the installed kernel. greetingst tpowa Except it does not include the kernel itself. Modules without a matching kernel are not that useful.
Well something similar is provided by me since ages here: https://downloads.archlinux.de/iso/archboot/2012.06/boot kernel+initramfs greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa@archlinux.org
participants (3)
-
Pierre Schmitz
-
Tobias Powalowski
-
Tom Gundersen