[arch-dev-public] [mkinitcpio][RFC] a better fallback image?

Pierre Schmitz pierre at archlinux.de
Fri Jul 27 11:52:45 EDT 2012

Am 26.07.2012 00:17, schrieb Dave Reisner:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 12:01:22AM +0200, Tom Gundersen wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 11:43 PM, Dave Reisner <d at falconindy.com> wrote:
>> > As an alternative/addition, which has also been brought up before, why
>> > don't we build in the most basic of modules? I'll bet we can cover at
>> > least 50% of the use cases by picking some choice pata/sata modules
>> > (e.g. ahci, ata_piix, pata_jmicron, sd_mod, ext4) and compiling them in
>> > staticly. It, of course, doesn't cover folks with non-trivial setups,
>> > but it provides a bulletproof bootstrap for a lot of people.
>> I really think this would be a good idea. I wanted to make some
>> additions to pierres pkgstats stuff so we could have an idea of how
>> large percentage of our users would be covered by the modules you
>> propose. I expect the vast majority would.
> Sure. I'd love to see the running kernel version and the first column of
> /proc/modules submitted with pkgstats. If we were to reset the global
> stats (or just reset the epoch) and make a concerted effort to have
> people submit (news post, social media, allan's blog, etc) I'll bet we
> could gather some good usage stats from -ARCH kernel consumers in a
> fairly short timeframe.

I have added pkgstats 2.3 to testing. It now sends the list of loaded
kernel modules and also the cpu architecture. 

Pierre Schmitz, https://pierre-schmitz.com

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list