Le 18/11/2025 à 12:10, g4sra via Dng a écrit :
> On Tuesday, November 18th, 2025 at 04:04, Steve Litt<slitt@???> wrote:
> -- snip --
>> If you don't object to having an initramfs, I don't see the
>> disadvantage of having everything in /usr/bin and having the other
>> stuff just be links.
>>
> -- snip --
>
> I DO.
> What is this obsession everybody has for complicating setups and increasing brittleness. There is only*two* good reasons for having an initramfs.
>
> 1) To get the root filesystem mounted - because you have some exotic root filesystem which is not supported by the kernel.
>
> 2) Because the initramfs*is* the root filesystem.
>
> The bad reason for having an initramfs is because the Distro forces it upon you filling it with loads of unnecessary junk that can break\conflict hardware and stall the bootstrap.
>
> If Red Hat had really been concerned with 'boot times' they would have done away with it.
>
    I see only one argument in favour of the pre-init phase with the
initrd as rootfs: allow for the final rootfs to be anything of your
choice without needing to build a custom kernel for every case or a
kernel for all possible cases.

    While in the pre-init phase, the  necessary disk driver and
filesystem manager are loaded as kernel modules, possibly also other
drivers (scsi, USB) needed to reach your disk, and then, the final
rootfs can be mounted.

    All these modules are stored in the initramfs, therefore you can
say: and why not compiled in the kernel, it would take less size overall
for the linux image. Sure, but all these drivers would stay in RAM
forever; on the contrary, with the pre-init method, only the drivers
really needed stay in RAM.

--     Didier