[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: 1-second kernel



Konstantin Svist wrote:
> 
> IIRC, the idea was to initialize hardware in parallel. The only thing
> (?) required for this to work is using kernel alone, without initrd.
> So my question is, how plausible is running Fedora without initrd? Don't
> the majority of users out there have similar hardware, making initrd
> unnecessary?
> 
If you build your own kernel, with everything you need to boot built
in, then you do not need an initrd. I guess I am not in the
"majority" because none of my machines has the same hardware. One
has SCSI drives, 2 more have different IDE controllers. Then there
is my Laptop with the SATA controller. I also have 2 older laptops
with different IDE controllers, and a third can not run Fedora (P75
with 40M of RAM) It works as a nice test bed for firewalls, IR to
network gateway, Wireless to Ethernet gateway, or a print server.

I also have a Stylistic 1000 with a 486 and 32M - it normally does
not have a keyboard - it uses a "pen" that acts as a mouse on the
screen, and an on screen keyboard. It has a PCMCIA slot that acts
like an IDE controller for the hard drive. (PCMCIA hard drive, or
memory card, or a conventional memory card in an adapter.)

Then there are the USB drives that are bootable. They need the
usb_storage module in the initrd as the hard drive controller.

Mikkel
-- 

  Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]