From: Dumas Patrice (dumas@centre-cired.fr)
Date: Wed Nov 22 2000 - 15:01:48 CET
>
> This (rustic) detection relie on a messaged in the boot log.
I don't think so. I copied from cdrom.fun
supported device 22 ide1 || abort "Kernel lack CDROM support."
I looked at supported in /setup/lib/basic, and it looks at /proc/devices.
> It is saved by /bin/scan, but I'm not sure.
Hum, as I disabled /bin/scan, as because of the old-ide interface compiled in
the kernel, fdisk freezed the computer.
> The "mu" script detect the loop-device with looking in the /proc/devices:
> it find something like:
>
> Block devices:
> ...
> 7 loop
> ....
>
> This is OK also for 2.2.* serie, or not?
Yes, that's allright. I didn't explain myself correctly.
In my case, the loop device is a module. So, if not in use it is not in
/proc/devices. But if a program try to use it, kmod insmod the module
automatically, so that it is now in /proc/devices.
With the old way, there was a try to mount loop device, so it worked (and as
a side effect, it appeared in /proc/devices, but it was of no use, as it
wasn't used to detect whether loop was available).
> It is true: I removed in 11.* this detection. The "mu" script now
> user directly the tree/usr/bin/mkfs.ext2 command. This save us from
> future incompatibilities.
good.
> A feature: BOOT = ROOT.raw + LILO.
Ok, I didn't well read the script, sorry.
> Anycase, most part of the work carried out by /linuxrc is replicated
> in the /etc/rc/4, after root is mounted. In this way, muLinux is able
> to work either using ramdisk, either when installed. In other words,
> it is double-face: ram Linux and HD Linux.
Yes, and it worked for me, as I only tried the 2.2 kernel with ram mu.
> > I will experiment, but advice is welcome.
> >
> If you do this work for your own experiments, it is ok. But if you
> plan to port muLinux on the 2.2.* series, I can't follow you and
> I'm not interested.
It's for me, as I (maybe ???) need to use old-ide interface that is compiled
in the kernel. But the kernel is too big for mu. I had to remove a lot cool
stuff in /usr/bin, in order to fit it on one disk, and I think it is these
kind of progs that make mu so cool. So I also think that a 2.2 kernel on mu
disk isn't a good thing.
But nevertheless, it could be interesting for mu to be the more indepenndant
of the kernel serie, so that there is nothing to change in mu-scripts with
another kernel.
I am also of your advice about kernel upgrade.
Pat
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mulinux-unsubscribe@sunsite.auc.dk
For additional commands, e-mail: mulinux-help@sunsite.auc.dk
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Sat Feb 08 2003 - 15:27:16 CET