LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   Slackware (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/)
-   -   noinitrd (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/noinitrd-4175697474/)

zeebra 07-09-2021 03:02 AM
noinitrd
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bassmadrigal (Post 6259972)
WILL YOU STOP PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH? You've been doing this a lot lately and I really don't appreciate it. I did NOT and never have advocated for no initrd on Slackware. Seriously, learn to read my posts. I'm trying to learn here and I don't appreciate you ignoring my post and pretending that I'm saying you're wrong.

I am asking why you think Slackware was being held back by not automatically generating an initrd and what "progress" can be accomplished since it is doing it now? I already provided several examples of when initrds are *needed* and you have now showed me one example of being able to recover a system that was poorly updated by having an initrd. But I can recover just as easy if I keep my old kernel and entry in the bootloader or if I have a usb boot setup. Having an initrd in the case you provided is one of many ways to recover the system I don't really see how this is the big "progress" you're preaching.

I'll quote your line again that I was asking the original question about:



What progress was made by automatically generating an initrd with the installer? Why do you believe that defaulting to huge was holding back Slackware?
I prefer to not use an initrd if possible, but in some cases I need one, so it's good to have the option to add one ;)

Having some experience with user generated boot and kernel issues, I personally find it way easier to fix those if there is not an initrd involved.

zeebra 07-09-2021 04:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyCyborg (Post 6259959)
OMG! What a huge complexity added! :D

With all respect, YOU and other Gurus here advocates an ancient method of boot, which make users to miss a very important recovery console, if you ignore anything else, while giving vague and questionable benefits of easiness.
Who is advocating easieness here actually? There are other ways to fix things than "recovery console", in my experience, recovery console is one of the least effective and least convenient ways to recover from boot/kernel issues. There are other way better and way more tested ways of doing it.

I don't see the problem really, if you NEED an initrd, then add one.
It's a pretty sane setup to only install a kernel, and install an initrd IF needed. Many people aren't even aware they don't need an initrd, some don't even know what it does, they just put it there because it seems like a default way of doing things. But there is nothing ancient about not using an initrd.

BTW, the sane option when adding a new Kernel is to keep the old boot option in case the new Kernel doesn't boot ;)

Skaendo 07-09-2021 05:41 AM
Just gonna throw my :twocents: in here, I have had nothing but problems with kernel updates once the BDFL decided to start generating an initrd from the installer. I have not even attempted to use the intel microcode.

I have/had a nice little system going for updating my kernel/initrd/microcode on 14.2. Now I just get boot fails on -current when I try to update the kernel so now it just gets blacklisted and I just say forget the microcode. It's safe for my Sandy Bridge right?

And it seems that when using the "mkinitrd_command_generator.sh" in 14.2 it just throws every USB driver or whatever they are in there so building the initrd was making the boot take longer (it added 2 or 3 lines to the "Loading Linux" screen) on my C2E laptop. I have not commented out the quick boot option in lilo to check if it is still doing it on -current.

But whatever, I'm too old and dumb to learn this new way so I'll just go on blacklisting the kernels and never worry about them.

zeebra 07-09-2021 05:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skaendo (Post 6265197)
Just gonna throw my :twocents: in here, I have had nothing but problems with kernel updates once the BDFL decided to start generating an initrd from the installer. I have not even attempted to use the intel microcode.

I have/had a nice little system going for updating my kernel/initrd/microcode on 14.2. Now I just get boot fails on -current when I try to update the kernel so now it just gets blacklisted and I just say forget the microcode. It's safe for my Sandy Bridge right?

And it seems that when using the "mkinitrd_command_generator.sh" in 14.2 it just throws every USB driver or whatever they are in there so building the initrd was making the boot take longer (it added 2 or 3 lines to the "Loading Linux" screen) on my C2E laptop. I have not commented out the quick boot option in lilo to check if it is still doing it on -current.

But whatever, I'm too old and dumb to learn this new way so I'll just go on blacklisting the kernels and never worry about them.
As you may or may not know, this discussion is extracted from another thread. I just thought it was an interesting discussion to continue (as some suggested). It's inconsequential to me personally, as I will almost always do my own thing with the Kernel anyways. But sane defaults are ofcourse good. And any time I've used Slackware the defaults have been sane. Another interest I have is that I'm a bit out of the loop in regards to "Slackware news", but it seemed to me from that discussion that Slackware has/will start installing an initrd image by default. Am I reading that right?

Personally it makes no difference, but I would prefer if it was an option rather than a default. I don't rightly remember, but it was always an option in Slackware, wasn't it? Is it now the default? Please feel free to keep me up to date ;)

Skaendo 07-09-2021 05:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeebra (Post 6265201)
As you may or may not know, this discussion is extracted from another thread. I just thought it was an interesting discussion to continue (as some suggested). It's inconsequential to me personally, as I will almost always do my own thing with the Kernel anyways. But sane defaults are ofcourse good. And any time I've used Slackware the defaults have been sane. Another interest I have is that I'm a bit out of the loop in regards to "Slackware news", but it seemed to me from that discussion that Slackware has/will start installing an initrd image by default. Am I reading that right?

Personally it makes no difference, but I would prefer if it was an option rather than a default. I don't rightly remember, but it was always an option in Slackware, wasn't it? Is it now the default? Please feel free to keep me up to date ;)
Yea, I seen that it came from the requests thread. And yes the -current installer generates a initrd near the end of the install (no option to not). I have done SO MANY reinstalls just because I don't want to mess with the kernel after having it fail on me SO MANY times. Life used to be so simple.

Skaendo 07-09-2021 06:14 AM
I just ran the mkinitrd_command_generator.sh on -current and I'm still seeing a list of USB modules (that's what they are) a mile long for my old Inspiron 1520 w/Intel C2E.

Edit:
Here is what gets generated:
Code:
mkinitrd -c -k 5.12.13 -f ext4 -r /dev/sda1 -m xhci-pci:ohci-pci:ehci-pci:xhci-hcd:uhci-hcd:ehci-hcd:hid:usbhid:i2c-hid:hid_generic:hid-asus:hid-cherry:hid-logitech:hid-logitech-dj:hid-logitech-hidpp:hid-lenovo:hid-microsoft:hid_multitouch:jbd2:mbcache:crc32c_intel:crc32c_generic:ext4 -u -o /boot/initrd.gz

zeebra 07-09-2021 06:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skaendo (Post 6265203)
Yea, I seen that it came from the requests thread. And yes the -current installer generates a initrd near the end of the install (no option to not). I have done SO MANY reinstalls just because I don't want to mess with the kernel after having it fail on me SO MANY times. Life used to be so simple.
I can't find any specific mentions about it, but ok. I'm reading up a bit on old stuff in regards to initrd, huge and generic. I think most distroes ship with a generic kernel with initrd, so the huge kernel approach is probably quite unique. I'm guessing it is a matter of preference in some ways.

But with huge kernel, I guess the initrd is not made automatically? Or is the discussion actually a matter of dropping the huge kernel entirely? If initrd is automatically generated, does huge kernel serve a purpose anymore at all? I guess it can be argued that it is an easier approach to combine huge and generic kernel into one, using initrd and compile into it all that cannot be a module, and anything that can be a module, as a module.

Skaendo 07-09-2021 06:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeebra (Post 6265211)
I can't find any specific mentions about it, but ok. I'm reading up a bit on old stuff in regards to initrd, huge and generic. I think most distroes ship with a generic kernel with initrd, so the huge kernel approach is probably quite unique. I'm guessing it is a matter of preference in some ways.

But with huge kernel, I guess the initrd is not made automatically? Or is the discussion actually a matter of dropping the huge kernel entirely? If initrd is automatically generated, does huge kernel serve a purpose anymore at all? I guess it can be argued that it is an easier approach to combine huge and generic kernel into one, using initrd and compile into it all that cannot be a module, and anything that can be a module, as a module.
All I know is that there is a initrd generated by the installer close to the end of the install.

I run Linux Mint on like 3 desktops and their package manager seems to not remove any old kernels, so you get to generate as many initrd's as you have kernels. I think that I have one up to like 4 kernels. But I don't care, again too old to start learning new tricks like that.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:25 AM.