SquashFS?

[Luciano Miguel Ferreira Rocha]

On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 04:24:13PM -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 19:33 +0100, Luciano Miguel Ferreira Rocha wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 08:20:00PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> > > We're working on a kernel-module-standard for fedora-extras. I can
> > > package unionfs and SqashFS then if that would be enough for the LiveCD.
> > > But there might be a small problem with SqashFS and the initrd:
> > 
> > A kernel-module-standard is a necessity for fedora-extras but not for
> > unionfs/squashfs, IMO. They're small, and can be compiled on-the-fly,
> > when creating the live cd iso.
> 
> This is a non-starter.  Allowing compilation of stuff adds far too much
> of a "random" element with regards to what's on the system.

I don't understand that sentence. A "mklivecd" program already has to:

1. create initial root
2. install packages
3. configure livecd system
4. create livecd initrd

What's the damage of adding:
3b. make unionfs squashfs?

> 
> > And I don't think the lack of support for a "squashed" initrd is a
> > problem. I believe initramfs works much better for livecds, anyway. :)
> 
> But you need to get the squashfs module into the initrd[1].
> 
> Jeremy
> 
> [1] Using initrd as a generic term for either initrd or initramfs.  Note
> that Core has been using initramfs by default since FC3... this is one
> of the reasons why I say that the changes for live CD at an
> infrastructure level need to be better integrated.  Peter has made some
> changes in mkinitrd which will help make this easier and I have the
> start of the changes for kadischi, but I probably won't get back to
> finishing them up until after test1

Well, I'd expected the initrd/initramfs to be cunstom built, anyway.
Specially for the part of searching for the livecd image (in a cdrom,
nfs, hdd, whatever).

And about current mkinitrd, isn't --preload=mod.ko sufficient?

-- 
lfr
0/0