On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 11:42:33AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Mo, 18.06.18 16:50, Ondřej Lysoněk (olysonek(a)redhat.com) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 18.6.2018 15:27, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Do, 14.06.18 14:20, Chris Murphy (lists(a)colorremedies.com) wrote:
> >
> >> The cited BLS spec is the original one, not the more thoroughly
> >> discussed and thought through variant by Matthew Garrett [1] some
> >> years ago.
> >
> > Quite frankly, as one of the authors of the original BLS spec, I can'd
> > say Matthew's version was much discussed with me...
> >
> > I mean, I am open to extending the spec, but we should do this bit by
> > bit.
> >
> > Zbigniew suggested to move the spec into docbook or markdown format,
> > and then accept changes via usual github PRs. If there's interest
> > still in extending the spec with some of Matthew's ideas we can
> > certainly look into that, but in general I'd actually prefer to reduce
> > the size of the spec if possible, and drop as many bits of it as we
> > can, i.e. the stuff noone implements anyway.
>
> It would be great if we could extend the spec with optional support for
> multiple initrd images (the Tuned daemon depends on that). Fedora's
> GRUB2 already supports multiple initrd images (it allows specifying
> multiple lines with the "initrd" key), but I'd like to make sure that
> whoever implements BLS in the future and decides to support multiple
> initrds will not choose a different syntax for it. Would you be open to
> extending the spec with that?
Sure, allowing multiple initrd keys in the snippets makes a ton of sense.
FTR, this got added in
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/1d8a48e8e3.
Zbyszek