[Fedora-livecd-list] Re: Seemingly divergent netboot/disklessrc and livecd/mayflower for initrd, init, etc...

[Bill Nottingham]

Bryan J Smith (bjs at redhat.com) said: 
> - Netboot/disklessrc
> 
> The current approach in system-config-netboot for Diskless clients is
> legacy (not even nash, so it looks like some re-use from circa-2003 or
> even earlier), but the "disklessrc" approach with they way it loads in
> the Diskless initrd "just works."  Not only does it "just work," but it
> works for RHEL 5 (possibly earlier).

This code is dead (long-term.) Note that mkinitrd itself has support
for NFS boot, iSCSI, etc.

> - LiveCD/mayflower
> 
> I've looked at the LiveCD tools now, including the mayflower initrd
> builder.  I've also looked at the results.  A lot of newer developments
> make assumptions on newer Anaconda/PyKickstart releases of post-RHEL 5
> Fedora releases.  I would definitely be interested in anyone who has
> concise information on what features are being used, otherwise, I'm
> looking at them as non-requirements (with my focus on RHEL 5).

There is a livecd-tools branch for RHEL 5 - I believe Rahul maintains
that.

> I've noted a few things I really don't care for, like dumping all
> modules in /lib/modules of the initrd, instead of maintaining some sort
> of tree like netboot/disklessrc does/uses.

Attempting to catalog a list of network/storage module is a long-term
failure. We do a hack in anaconda by looking for modules that reference
certain needed symbols (register_net_device, register_block, etc.), but
it's still a hack.

> - What I want (should force myself to do)
> 
> What I want -- aka what I should force myself to do so I more than a fat
> guy just eating up oxygen ;) -- is try to build a new, flexible initrd
> creator (call it "snitrd" out of my frustration ;) and .  I don't know
> if there are other projects out there trying to do this, so please let
> me know if someone already has been tackling this.
> 
> The concept is basically this (putting the Anaconda install-to-disc to
> the side for now) ...
> 
> - Can generate a Diskless initrd (disklessrc init, various network)
> - Can generate a ISO initrd (like mayflower's init, various fs/etc...)
> - Can generate a Disk initrd (more than just squashfs?  new init)
> - Can generate a "Super" initrd (take various boot init= options)
> 
> Additionally, I was going to add the following options in the new "Disk"
> initrd init (think flash/embedded):  
> 
> - Option to compare image checksums to TFTP server, update if different
> - Option to boot diskless if local boot fails (trap failures/set flag)
> 
> Does anyone else think this is a good idea?  I don't think the Diskless,
> ISO and basic Disk initrd/init options are too difficult.  The more
> embedded options could come later, as could the RHEL 5
> Anaconda/PyKickstart v. newer Fedora differences/detections as well.
> 
> Right now I could really use a single toolset to do at least some of the
> above.  And I'm having to choose between the limited/stagnant
> Netboot/disklessrc and the more leading Fedora-centric LiveCD/mayflower.
> 
> Anyone think I'm off my rocker?  Over-complicating a simple issue?
> Don't know the first thing of what I'm talking about?  Etc...?  ;)

Honestly, I'm not sure what we really need right now is Yet Another
initrd project. There's talk of a new upstream one that can hopefully
be shared by multiple distros, but that's still a ways off from production.
In the meantime, it's probably better to just fix what's there.

Bill