From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gentoo-user+bounces-131893-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1RWINH-0007G6-Rc
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 02 Dec 2011 01:57:16 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 048DB21C06C;
Fri, 2 Dec 2011 01:56:54 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from svr-us4.tirtonadi.com (svr-us4.tirtonadi.com [69.65.43.212])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DD4E21C027
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 01:55:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-pz0-f53.google.com ([209.85.210.53])
by svr-us4.tirtonadi.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.69)
(envelope-from <pandu@poluan.info>)
id 1RWILl-002wpo-TW
for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 02 Dec 2011 08:55:42 +0700
Received: by dade7 with SMTP id e7so1649289dad.40
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 01 Dec 2011 17:55:38 -0800 (PST)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.199.131 with SMTP id jk3mr9664290pbc.105.1322790938092;
Thu, 01 Dec 2011 17:55:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.143.14.5 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Dec 2011 17:55:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.143.14.5 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Dec 2011 17:55:35 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20111130202828.34f30c74@karnak.local>
References: <CAPFNKCJwCPKgW4guD_XaiMjx-Ln9AoSb1F1wPVF+dja8ru8gaQ@mail.gmail.com>
<20111130152753.176a9a08@hactar.digimed.co.uk>
<CAPFNKCJm0BP8NA-7ULdD+D+=4br-vjuUp+cOf7EB0k2YvfzeJg@mail.gmail.com>
<jb5r80$23o$1@dough.gmane.org>
<4ED67664.1060302@gmail.com>
<20111130202828.34f30c74@karnak.local>
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 08:55:35 +0700
Message-ID: <CAA2qdGWMgoHRiqjVTyhbeTdZs50ZGguy4uJarDVmWC2ArWbquA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Full disk encryption
From: Pandu Poluan <pandu@poluan.info>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f642d20fa235104b31243a8
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - svr-us4.tirtonadi.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.gentoo.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - poluan.info
X-Archives-Salt: b72a6eef-ed7d-4740-9513-36979e472f40
X-Archives-Hash: 3f8eb76c292a0f2cc4495df2709072fd
--e89a8f642d20fa235104b31243a8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Dec 1, 2011 3:32 AM, "David W Noon" <dwnoon@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
----- >8 snip
>
> I have a working initramfs layout, but currently it is too large
> (>32MiB) for my /boot partition. The problem package is e2fsprogs, as
> it requires dynamic linkage and, consequently, a full-sized glibc.
> This sucks, so I need to patch the Makefile(s) to build a more sensible
> set of executables for an initramfs.
>
> All of the code I have written myself compiles and links statically,
> typically using klibc, so my finished code is tiny.
>
> I haven't been working on this for a couple of months now, because the
> need for it is not really pressing. The assertion that udev would
> require /usr and /var (plus the kitchen sink) really soon is unfounded,
> at least for those of us who run more elderly hardware.
>
> Anyhow, when I'm finished there will be a zsh script that will build an
> initramfs image, and even install it to /boot, with a single command.
You know, Debian has an e2fsck-static package. Why don't Gentoo, I
wonder...
That said, you *can* have an "almost-static" e2fsck if you compile it
yourself.
Rgds,
--e89a8f642d20fa235104b31243a8
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<p><br>
On Dec 1, 2011 3:32 AM, "David W Noon" <<a href=3D"mailto:dwno=
on@ntlworld.com">dwnoon@ntlworld.com</a>> wrote:<br>
></p>
<p>----- >8 snip</p>
<p>><br>
> I have a working initramfs layout, but currently it is too large<br>
> (>32MiB) for my /boot partition. =C2=A0The problem package is e2fsp=
rogs, as<br>
> it requires dynamic linkage and, consequently, a full-sized glibc.<br>
> This sucks, so I need to patch the Makefile(s) to build a more sensibl=
e<br>
> set of executables for an initramfs.<br>
><br>
> All of the code I have written myself compiles and links statically,<b=
r>
> typically using klibc, so my finished code is tiny.<br>
><br>
> I haven't been working on this for a couple of months now, because=
the<br>
> need for it is not really pressing. =C2=A0The assertion that udev woul=
d<br>
> require /usr and /var (plus the kitchen sink) really soon is unfounded=
,<br>
> at least for those of us who run more elderly hardware.<br>
><br>
> Anyhow, when I'm finished there will be a zsh script that will bui=
ld an<br>
> initramfs image, and even install it to /boot, with a single command.<=
/p>
<p>You know, Debian has an e2fsck-static package. Why don't Gentoo,=C2=
=A0 I wonder... </p>
<p>That said, you *can* have an "almost-static" e2fsck if you com=
pile it yourself. </p>
<p>Rgds, <br></p>
--e89a8f642d20fa235104b31243a8--