ext3 compiled-in vs module in FC4

[James W. Bennett]

Tim Taranov wrote:

>I thougt so too, howevever double, triple checking everything wasn't helping. 
>
>Then I found some threads somewhere on google about the same problem
>and they all were coming having ext3 compiled-in. When I did this -
>the boot issue went away.
>
>On 5/23/05, Dave Jones <davej at redhat.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 03:33:33PM -0400, Tim Taranov wrote:
>> > Hi -
>> >
>> > I was wondering why FC4 has ext3 as a kernel module rather than having
>> > it  compiled into the kernel?
>> >
>> > The reason I'm asking is because I encountered an issue with booting
>> > FC4 from a raid volume with ext3 compiled as a module (the default
>> > configuration) - the kernel would panic after not being able to mount
>> > /. After I rebuilt the kernel to have the ext3 compiled-into the
>> > kernel, the booting problem went away (my /boot and / are ext3-based,
>> > running off a h/w raid controller based volume).
>> >
>> > I was using the default FC4 test 3 at the time - I haven't tried it
>> > with the latest kernel, but I suspect the results may be the same.
>>
>>If your initrd is made correctly, it shouldn't matter which way
>>its built.
>>
>>               Dave
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
I am using FC4 test3 and I compiled kernel 2.6.11.10 and ext3 as a 
modules and I have no problems.  It boots   clean everytime.