initrd creation - Embedded

This is a discussion on initrd creation - Embedded ; Hi, I'm working with embedded linux 2.4, and up till recently have been building everything on a RH9 linux box (also 2.4). I've just transitioned over to a 2.6 host (but still running with an embedded 2.4). Suddenly my created ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: initrd creation

  1. initrd creation

    Hi,
    I'm working with embedded linux 2.4, and up till recently have been
    building everything
    on a RH9 linux box (also 2.4). I've just transitioned over to a 2.6
    host (but still running
    with an embedded 2.4). Suddenly my created initrd.img is not loading
    on my target.
    I'm guessing there must be some difference between mke2fs on 2.4 host
    vs 2.6 host, but I really have no clue.
    Anyone have any ideas?
    Thanks
    Ed


  2. Re: initrd creation

    Ed wrote:
    > Hi,
    > I'm working with embedded linux 2.4, and up till recently have been
    > building everything
    > on a RH9 linux box (also 2.4). I've just transitioned over to a 2.6
    > host (but still running
    > with an embedded 2.4). Suddenly my created initrd.img is not loading
    > on my target.
    > I'm guessing there must be some difference between mke2fs on 2.4 host
    > vs 2.6 host, but I really have no clue.


    > Anyone have any ideas?


    > Thanks
    > Ed



    Did you notice that the module tools are different for version
    2.4 and version 2.6 kernels?

    The initial RAM disk is usually used to get modules needed
    but not compiled into the kernel.

    HTH

    --

    Tauno Voipio
    tauno voipio (at) iki fi


  3. Re: initrd creation


    Tauno Voipio wrote:
    > Ed wrote:
    > > Hi,
    > > I'm working with embedded linux 2.4, and up till recently have been
    > > building everything
    > > on a RH9 linux box (also 2.4). I've just transitioned over to a 2.6
    > > host (but still running
    > > with an embedded 2.4). Suddenly my created initrd.img is not loading
    > > on my target.
    > > I'm guessing there must be some difference between mke2fs on 2.4 host
    > > vs 2.6 host, but I really have no clue.

    >
    > > Anyone have any ideas?

    >
    > > Thanks
    > > Ed

    >
    >
    > Did you notice that the module tools are different for version
    > 2.4 and version 2.6 kernels?
    >
    > The initial RAM disk is usually used to get modules needed
    > but not compiled into the kernel.
    >
    > HTH
    >
    > --
    >
    > Tauno Voipio
    > tauno voipio (at) iki fi

    Yep, on the 2.4 host, mke2fs is 1.32 (09-Nov-2002) and on the 2.6
    host its 1.35 (28-Feb-2004). I tried using the 1.32 version on the 2.6
    kernel and that didn't make
    any difference.
    Thanks


  4. Re: initrd creation

    Ed wrote:
    > Tauno Voipio wrote:
    >
    >>Ed wrote:
    >>
    >>>Hi,
    >>>I'm working with embedded linux 2.4, and up till recently have been
    >>>building everything
    >>>on a RH9 linux box (also 2.4). I've just transitioned over to a 2.6
    >>>host (but still running
    >>>with an embedded 2.4). Suddenly my created initrd.img is not loading
    >>>on my target.
    >>>I'm guessing there must be some difference between mke2fs on 2.4 host
    >>>vs 2.6 host, but I really have no clue.

    >>
    >>>Anyone have any ideas?

    >>
    >>>Thanks
    >>>Ed

    >>
    >>
    >>Did you notice that the module tools are different for version
    >>2.4 and version 2.6 kernels?
    >>
    >>The initial RAM disk is usually used to get modules needed
    >>but not compiled into the kernel.

    >
    > Yep, on the 2.4 host, mke2fs is 1.32 (09-Nov-2002) and on the 2.6
    > host its 1.35 (28-Feb-2004). I tried using the 1.32 version on the 2.6
    > kernel and that didn't make
    > any difference.


    Neither should it - the filesystem creation (mke2fs) is here irrelevant.

    The module tools are for managing kernel modules, those pieces of
    code you need the initrd for.

    For the migration, you could start at
    .

    HTH

    --

    Tauno Voipio
    tauno voipio (at) iki fi

+ Reply to Thread