| Re: [cooking] booting loram-cdrom on usb ( was: [cooking] various boot modes, successes and failures) |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/slitaz Archives
]
- To: slitaz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [cooking] booting loram-cdrom on usb ( was: [cooking] various boot modes, successes and failures)
- From: Philippe Lelédy <slitaz@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2010 15:24:22 +0100
On 28/12/2010 21:52, pascal.bellard@xxxxxxxxxx wrote
if enough RAM, compressed FS is copied in RAM, if not it's remains
on USB. Without this feature, it would have been impossible to add more
packages.
The root filesystem is *always* writeable thanks to aufs.
Of course ! But my system is big, and aimed at computers most of which
have 512M. With loram-ram on such systems, every heavy application is
killed by famous the Linux kernel Out Of Memory killer.
Next feature request: this is like loram-ram is no more useful because
loram-smallcdrom provides the same functionality + the ability to run
from the usb; perhaps it's time to merge with the third way of booting:
it should be possible to expand the squashfs.xz and obtains the same
functionality as RAM mode. Should unsquashfs be more expensive than
unlzma done by kernel.
Why ? / is writeable and files under / look *exactly* like a filesystem
uncompressed by then kernel unlzma.
Of course ! The reason for me ? Only for not having to run build-loram
after each gen-distro, for not having two isos to distribute, for not
having two rootfs.gz to choose from at boot time depending on the ram
available, for not having to speak any-more about this issue to new-bie:
I'd like the 3 modes of booting (ram, loram-ram, loram-smallcdrom) be
only a last minute choice (at boot time) and not a choice at download time.
BTW, why speak of loram as flavors ?. They are not flavors, but
variations about the way to use storage.
Because pre 3.0 loram was flavors only
(http://hg.slitaz.org/flavors/file/tip, squashed /usr + optional aufs).
Now we have tazlitobox flavors too (squashed / + aufs).
Thanks for this info, but this mis-naming made me waste hours and hours
trying to gen-distro them before I understanding they was not flavors,
that flavors tools can't be use to build them, but only tazlito
build-loram ! Time to change the naming ?
Ph.L
---
SliTaz GNU/Linux Mailing list - http://www.slitaz.org/