Earlier today, I wrote that I was bascically neutral about this.
After reading other postings and thinking about the issue more
myself, I am now in favor "kmod follows init's root" because:
1. I think that we probably would get obscure unrepeatable
technical suppot problems related to anonymous FTP otherwise.
2. I also realize that while putting kernel modules in the
anonymous FTP area is something like the situation with
shared libraries, new kernels are released every couple
of days, while new C libraries are released roughly
monthly. (How's that for a statement about free
software development cycles?)
3. I would rather not have to worry about accidental
contamination of the kernel from other chroot'ed
environments (e.g., I accidentally load an outdated
iBCS module).
4. If we're going to develop some kind of "modprobe -r -a"
to run help programs before unloading modules, this will
probably do the wrong thing with modules loaded from
alternative roots.
Your change may mean that in order for a ramdisk that uses
"exec chroot /mnt /sbin/init" to work with modprobe, the ramdisk
program will have to be named /sbin/init instead of /linuxrc and the
kernel's "real root" field will have to be set to the ramdisk, but that's
a stylistic change I've wanted to make to our ramdisks anyhow.
Adam J. Richter __ ______________ 4880 Stevens Creek Blvd, Suite 205
adam@yggdrasil.com \ / San Jose, California 95129-1034
+1 408 261-6630 | g g d r a s i l United States of America
fax +1 408 261-6631 "Free Software For The Rest Of Us."
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu