To boot or to Chroot.

robert baker robertmbaker at gmail.com
Tue May 12 20:24:17 PDT 2009


On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Robert Connolly
<robert at linuxfromscratch.org> wrote:
> On Tuesday May 12 2009 10:33:09 pm robert baker wrote:
>> I am curious what your oppinion is on converting to a structure more
>> like CLFS. Giving the option to boot or chroot depending on your hosts
>> features.
>
> I was thinking something like a chapter for /tools, another chapter for
> building a system to reboot with udev etc, and another chapter for final
> system. The reboot chapter could be skipped if you chroot. I think a lot of
> users will need to reboot, unless they modify their host kernel in advance
> with prerequisites. I don't know of any distro with a kernel that has all the
> drivers needed to pass glibc's test suite, and posix capabilities, except
> maybe the newest Slackware.
>
> robert
>
> --
> http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/hlfs-dev
> FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
> Unsubscribe: See the above information page
>
>

Ok that souns pretty good. If you would like I will upload my
additions into a new directory tomorrow evening. The comments are
still sparse, but the commands are functional.

I know you mentioned it in passing some time ago, but I did want to
confirm the clf-bootscripts work like a charm. I have been using them
to do my work. Let me know if you have any objections to using these
scripts.

Also I did notice the comments about prefering patches over seds for
source reuse. I have a patch for clfs-bootscripts that is a
combination of a few seds needed to make the minimal system
initscripts run from within /tools/etc. Would you prefer the seds as
commands on the bootscript page, or a patch?

Robert Baker



More information about the hlfs-dev mailing list