I demand that Alexander E. Patrakov may or may not have written... > Kay Sievers wrote: >> There is also the plan to do parallel device probing inside the kernel >> some day, that will make the situation of relying on kernel names even >> more fragile.
> Right, this means that the way of passing "root=/dev/hdc2" will no longer > work because /dev/hdc will sometimes become /dev/hde. I'd call that broken, just as I consider udev (076) to be broken given that it breaks expectations wrt device naming. (Here, it swapped the names of the DVD drives (drivers are built-in) and sound devices (drivers are modular).) If the parallel probing is done such that the naming remains predicatable, that's good. Whether it's faster doesn't matter - userspace isn't affected and doesn't require modification, and that's a good thing. > If you are serious about going to implement this, first add (to > linux-2.6.16?) a boot-time warning if the kernel is booting without > initramfs. The warning should say something like this: > WARNING: you have booted the kernel without initramfs and passed an > explicit root device name. I see no problem with booting like that. I've always used the root device name; why should I forced to change should a kernel upgrade become necessary just because of some should-be-in-2.7.x [1] breakage? > This will no longer work when the kernel will probe devices in parallel > (i.e., since linux-2.6.??) because device ordering will be random. Please > create an initramfs that mounts the root device using some stable > attribute, like label or UUID. That'd be "stable and duplicatable", and I fully expect somebody to run into that sooner or later... [1] Heated discussion, anybody? ;-) -- | Darren Salt | nr. Ashington, | d youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk | Debian, | Northumberland | s zap,tartarus,org | RISC OS | Toon Army | @ | Kill all extremists! I've got 256K of RAM, so why can't I run Windows 3.1? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
