From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HKAFz-0004oG-4i for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 22 Feb 2007 09:28:55 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l1M9R4Cl017378; Thu, 22 Feb 2007 09:27:04 GMT Received: from mail.pipni.cz (mail.pipni.cz [193.86.238.3]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l1M9Id1D005999 for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2007 09:18:39 GMT Received: from mail.pipni.cz ([193.86.238.3]:38414 helo=xvalheru.org) id 1HKA5v-0002wE-1o for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 22 Feb 2007 10:18:33 +0100 From: "pat" To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] ramfs - is it necessary ??? Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 10:18:28 +0100 Message-Id: <20070222091510.M12110@xvalheru.org> In-Reply-To: <200702221108.31090.alan@linuxholdings.co.za> References: <45DCCAED.40709@xvalheru.org> <200702220950.22067.alan@linuxholdings.co.za> <20070222081405.2e410560@krikkit.digimed.co.uk> <200702221108.31090.alan@linuxholdings.co.za> X-Mailer: OpenWebMail 2.52 20061019 X-OriginatingIP: 82.113.61.50 (pat@xvalheru.org) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: b2ca9100-3a6c-4082-9735-0d3049254932 X-Archives-Hash: ec7add536f875d02fdc87a70fd0ed14f Thanks to all. Now it cleaner to me :-) Only (probably) last question: If I want to play with the Xen I can compile SATA support directly to kernel and it will be still OK ??? Once again thanks a lot. Pat On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 11:08:31 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote > On Thursday 22 February 2007, Neil Bothwick wrote: > > On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 09:50:22 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: > > > But you are mostly right, around here in Gentoo-land it's become > > > almost a guerilla rite of passage to be able to drop genkernel and > > > roll your own (raid users excepted of course) > > > > Why? RAID support is as simple as selecting a couple of options in > > menuconfig. Or were you thinking of LVM? That needs an initr* to use > > it on /. > > hardware raid or software raid? A decent controller will just do > raid and give you a b lock device to boot from. What about those > stupid el-cheapo so-called raid controllers that are actually little > more than bus adapters with four drives attached and you do the real > raid in software? That will need an initr* > > > Dropping genkernel is almost always a good thing. If you roll your > > own kernel, you will have a better understanding of what's going on > > and what you need. > > Yes, very true. But genkernel is a useful interim measure to help > get our users from using a binary blob kernel to successfully > rolling their own. > > alan > > -- > Optimists say the glass is half full, > Pessimists say the glass is half empty, > Developers say wtf is the glass twice as big as it needs to be? > > Alan McKinnon > alan at linuxholdings dot co dot za > +27 82, double three seven, one nine three five > -- > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list