On Mon, 04 May 2020 22:40:46 +0200 Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:
On Mon, 04 May 2020 19:01:18 +0200, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
04.05.2020 14:17, Takashi Iwai пишет:
On Mon, 04 May 2020 12:37:01 +0200, Daniel Molkentin wrote:
Hi,
In an effort to get the naming right. I would like to propose renaming the /boot/initrd-$(uname -r) images to /boot/initramfs-$(uname -r).img.
Rationale: We are not using initrd's (that is: actual block devices) for a long time now. Instead, an initramfs is a cpio archive that gets deflated to a tmpfs. And, this would allow me to drop some more of our vendor patches off dracut.
I am currently collecting affected packages. So far I found:
- aaa_base (refresh_initrd script)
- YaST
- grub
- kdump
- perl-Bootloader
Anything I am missing?
The kernel-default and co who own those initrd files.
And that'll be tricky -- if we rename it, which file name to be packaged would depend on dracut package, but dracut isn't included in the build requirement for the kernel binary package. So we can't know whether dracut prefers initramfs or initrd at the package build time.
Why not own both initrd and initramfs? After all, it is just a %ghost, it need not exist.
Having both may confuse the package size calculation. You can find in kernel-default.spec that kernel puts some (fixed) sized empty file as a dummy initrd.
So this kind of change itches at every place in details...
Also it won't retroactively happen for existing kernels. So if new kernel pulls in new dracut with new naming the old kernel will leave initramfs behind. Thanks Michal -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org