newly compiled kernel no .img file

newly compiled kernel no .img file

[rohit prasad]

Hi, 

 I have recompiled the linux 2.4.7-10 kernel to get ntfs readonly support.

 this is what I entered in the lilo.conf in the fllowing order,

 NEWLY COMPILED KERNEL IMAGE
 OLD KERNEL IMAGE
 WINDOWS 	

 
 image=/boot/wmlinux-2.4.7-10
	label=xunil
	read-only
	root=/dev/hda2
 image=/boot/vmlinuz-2.4.7-10old
	label=linux
	initrd=/boot/initrd-2.4.7-10.img
	read-only
	root=/dev/hda2
other=/dev/hda1
	optional
	label=windows

If you notice the first declaration of image the 
"initrd=/boot/initrd-2.4.7-10.img" is not present . Of course I removed it so that there would be no kernel panic and I am able to boot into the new kernel (xunil). 
What I want to know is what is this .img file why is it required in the original kernel compilation and not in the newer . 

 Am I missing something here that could later on create problems.

All help will be gratefully ackd.

TIA,
Rohit
___________________________________________________________________________
Visit http://www.visto.com.
Find out  how companies are linking mobile users to the 
enterprise with Visto.

Re: newly compiled kernel no .img file

[Brian Gerst]

rohit prasad wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>  I have recompiled the linux 2.4.7-10 kernel to get ntfs readonly support.
> 
>  this is what I entered in the lilo.conf in the fllowing order,
> 
>  NEWLY COMPILED KERNEL IMAGE
>  OLD KERNEL IMAGE
>  WINDOWS
> 
> 
>  image=/boot/wmlinux-2.4.7-10
>         label=xunil
>         read-only
>         root=/dev/hda2
>  image=/boot/vmlinuz-2.4.7-10old
>         label=linux
>         initrd=/boot/initrd-2.4.7-10.img
>         read-only
>         root=/dev/hda2
> other=/dev/hda1
>         optional
>         label=windows
> 
> If you notice the first declaration of image the
> "initrd=/boot/initrd-2.4.7-10.img" is not present . Of course I removed it so that there would be no kernel panic and I am able to boot into the new kernel (xunil).
> What I want to know is what is this .img file why is it required in the original kernel compilation and not in the newer .

Your distribution put that there so that it can use modules for drivers
that are required to mount the root filesystem (ie. SCSI, fs driver,
etc.).  If you build your own kernel, those drivers should be built
non-modular, therefore you won't need an initrd.

--

				Brian Gerst

Re: newly compiled kernel no .img file

[Matt Bernstein]

At 11:40 -0500 Brian Gerst wrote:

>> If you notice the first declaration of image the >
>> "initrd=/boot/initrd-2.4.7-10.img" is not present . Of course I removed
>> it so that there would be no kernel panic and I am able to boot into the
>> new kernel (xunil). > What I want to know is what is this .img file why
>> is it required in the original kernel compilation and not in the newer .
>
>Your distribution put that there so that it can use modules for drivers
>that are required to mount the root filesystem (ie. SCSI, fs driver,
>etc.).  If you build your own kernel, those drivers should be built
>non-modular, therefore you won't need an initrd.

Yes for most users.

I'd like to build a quite generic 2.4 tree with everything as a module
where possible. I am forced to compile in binfmt_elf, initrd and romfs.

This allows me to use one tree for several different machines (some might
have an ext3 / on an IDE HDD; others maybe reiserfs on a gdth controller
etc..) without a huge amount of dead code in the kernel. So.. when a
subset of them are buggy we can see what modules they have in common..

My question: is this mega-module setup likely to be less stable than a
monolith? I'm not fussed about a % or two performance loss.

Matt