From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964989AbVHYNtf (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2005 09:49:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964990AbVHYNte (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2005 09:49:34 -0400 Received: from ylpvm43-ext.prodigy.net ([207.115.57.74]:39144 "EHLO ylpvm43.prodigy.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964989AbVHYNte (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2005 09:49:34 -0400 X-ORBL: [67.124.117.85] Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 06:49:31 -0700 From: Chris Wedgwood To: robotti@godmail.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Initramfs and TMPFS! Message-ID: <20050825134931.GB6703@taniwha.stupidest.org> References: <200508250435.j7P4ZM1g015411@ms-smtp-01.rdc-nyc.rr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200508250435.j7P4ZM1g015411@ms-smtp-01.rdc-nyc.rr.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 12:35:22AM -0400, robotti@godmail.com wrote: > I don't know, because tar is probably more widely used and > consequently people are more familiar with how to use it. As I said before, the cpio format is cleaner/easier to parse in the kernel. Everyone has cpio probably so using tar isn't necessary. > But, that is not as important as having the option of using tmpfs > as the initramfs. Well, it's not clean that we really want this either. I have some niche needs for it but I suspect most people will never use such an option.