[klibc] klibc and what's the next step?

H. Peter Anvin hpa at zytor.com
Tue Jul 11 09:24:00 PDT 2006

Olaf Hering wrote:
>>> The other group is the one that uses some sort of initrd (loop mount or cpio),
>>> created with tools from their distribution.
>>> Again, they should install that kinit binary as well because kinit emulates
>>> the loop mount handling of /initrd.image. This is for older distributions
>>> that still create a loop mounted initrd.
>> There's no need for loop-mounting of any initrd.images.  Initramfs (cpio image,
>> possible gzipped) works just fine, and it will NOT go away because something
>> should do the unpacking/loading of that image so that kinit &Co will run.
>> There's no need for old initrd+pivot_root at all.  Only the ones who are,
>> for some reason, didn't switch to initramfs yet.  And I personally see no
>> reasons not to switch - initramfs (rootfs) concept is much more clean and
>> easy to handle and gives more possibilities than initrd.
> Are you saying that everyone now suddenly is forced to use a cpio image?
> Why did hpa add the loop mount code to kinit?
> So if you force people who build kernels to use newer tools, one more
> external binary will surely not hurt.

When you say "loop mount code" I presume you mean legacy initrd support 
(which doesn't use loop mounting.)  Legacy initrd support is provided to 
be as compatible as possible, obviously.

And yes, it should be a configurable.  Chopping kinit into configurable 
pieces is on my short list.


More information about the klibc mailing list