On Sun, 2007-08-12 at 23:13 -0500, Douglas McClendon wrote:
I have a few changes I'd like to request to mayflower. I'd
like to get
some feedback before actually laying down the effort of producing patches.
So from a big high-level point of view, I'd really rather _not_ add lots
more that people depend on from mayflower. Having two different
codebases to handle the initramfs (mayflower + mkinitrd) is incredibly
painful for having to adapt both for changes in the OS, etc.
And given that overall mkinitrd "does more", I think it's going to be
better to get the live image specific stuff integrated into mkinitrd
rather than spending a lot of time making mayflower more flexible for
the sake of flexibility.
But to comment on the concepts...
#1 - mayflower.conf - add PROGRAMS and FILES
FILES+= would differ from PROGRAMS, in that the auto shared library
dependency check would not apply to them. Maybe that doesn't matter,
and you could just have FILES.
Having two different lists is just asking for people to pick the wrong
one. Since I can't think of a real reason that you'd want a binary
without its deps, just lump them together.
#2 - support user specified mayflower.conf location
(i.e. not just /etc/mayflower.conf)
Not terribly against or for this. Having the ability to specify config
locations is often useful enough for writing test cases that it's
#3 - optional program, sort of like existing shell cmdline arg
Have a cmdline argument of program= and eprogram= which would cause the
specified program to be executed. program= would happen right after the
current shell, and eprogram would happen right after the current eshell.
Why not just use init= ? Other than the fact that doing so is currently
broken with mayflower (... see above comments about two implementations
of the same thing :-)