[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20040312011619.GA23325@warszawa.7bulls.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 02:16:19 +0100
From: rafal.wojtczuk@...lls.com (Rafal Wojtczuk)
To: owl-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: modules on the CD - yet another question
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 03:37:18AM +0300, Solar Designer wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:45:44PM +0100, Rafal Wojtczuk wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 01:13:53AM +0300, Solar Designer wrote:
> > > A better approach might be to move all the disk controller drivers
> > > into the 1.44 MB floppy image (either compile them into the kernel
> > > like we do now or start using initrd), but to make that possible at
> > > the same time remove all non-essential non-disk drivers and even
> > > entire kernel subsystems into modules available only on the CD
> >
> > Well, perhaps the long-time goal would be to support initrd,
>
> I'm not sure what this would help with. If we use initrd for disk
> controller drivers, the initrd image would need to be fit in a floppy
Ah, right. As regards space requirements, it's the same.
> > and during the
> > installation to generate a proper initrd with required drivers (like
> > "mkinitrd"(8) does on RH).
>
> What for? Would the final installed system continue using initrd?
Yes, that was my intention. This would simplify the installation, removing
the need for kernel compilation, and not bloating it with all possible
drivers. But it is not that crucial, and most people want to compile a
custom kernel anyway.
>
> > > > some (conflicting like 3COM 3c5x9 and 3c90x)
> > >
> > > I'm not sure you're correct about this pair of drivers. CONFIG_EL3
> > > (for 3c509) and CONFIG_VORTEX (for 3c59x and 3c90x) may both be
> > > enabled at the same time, -- and are enabled on the Owl 1.1 CDs.
> > They can be both compiled in the kernel - which is in fact a bug in kernel
> > config. I once experienced a situation when 3c90x driver claimed the
> > resources of a 3c59x card (because PCI IDs are similar enough), which resulted
> > in non-functional eth0.
>
> Hmm. I thought that _both_ 3c90x and 3c59x are supported by the
> driver enabled with CONFIG_VORTEX. This is what the description for
> that configuration option says. Is that not correct?
I don't know how these drivers behave currently, and I do not have now the
card which was recognized by both drivers, so I cannot answer that; at least
in past this was a problem.
RW
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
