> Would it be so hard for the kernel guys to add a
"noinitrdconfig"
> target to the makefile that would generate a kernel
config with
>From everything I've seen, the kernel developers are a
fairly insular,
single-purpose kind of group these days. If what you're
trying to do here
is of interest to business, then try submitting it; they
might accept it.
If it's something only non-commercial users are likely to
want, however,
they'll probably ignore you. I remember reading about why
Con Kolivas quit
as a developer a week or so back. Because the work he was
doing was for end
users; i.e., the desktop, they basically ignored him until
he got sick of
it, and then because he got some press, Linus predictably
tried to whitewash
it and make excuses afterwards.
IMHO a really awesome thing would be if someone created a
universal
implementation of whatever bits of a kernel needed to be
universal,
(presumably module framework, executable format, and maybe
the bootloader)
and then we saw a lot of people doing completely their own
thing outside
that. Some would be really bloated, some would be really
efficient, some
would be tied primarily to one compiler, (say GCC) and
others would be based
around the other compilers. (Amsterdam, Tendra, ICC) You'd
also see
multiple implementations of things like job control, memory
management, and
so forth...and even people like me who sadly don't have any
idea how to
actually write a kernel from scratch but who still know that
they'd like
another one, (in my own case primarily in order to have a
kernel which was
entirely free of association with/dependency on the FSF,
even including
GCC - not even the BSD kernels have that) could shop between
the various
implementations in order to find the best implementation for
the specific
tasks they were doing.
I know anyone commercially minded (or unintelligent) here
will wince in
horror at the idea of the supposed anarchic splintering that
the above
scenario would lead to...same as how people hate the fact
that there are so
many different distros and package management
implementations in existence
already. What said people don't understand though, is that
that is actually
how evolutionary biology works; you have a large number of
potential
candidates, and each gets selected based on their fitness
for the given
purpose. Monoculture isn't a good thing, and the only
reason why most of
the people who want one do so is because having a
monoculture means they
don't have to think.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/alfs-discu
ss
FAQ: http://www.linux
fromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
|
gcom.com> wrote:
> This has absolutely nothing at all to do with alfs. I
just need to
> vent so please forgive me.
>
> Why on earth is it so difficult to make a kernel
configuration from
> scratch that doesn't require an initrd image.
Alternatively, you can be on the (LFS) bleeding edge and use
the
mkinitramfs utility that Bryan Kadzban has been working on.
--