Do I need a new initrd? - Setup

This is a discussion on Do I need a new initrd? - Setup ; If I want to compile (and then boot into) a new kernel, is it necessary that I make a new initrd too? Or can I stick with the (working) initrd that came with my Linux distribution (SuSE 10.3), which has ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Do I need a new initrd?

  1. Do I need a new initrd?

    If I want to compile (and then boot into) a new kernel, is it
    necessary that I make a new initrd too? Or can I stick with the
    (working) initrd that came with my Linux distribution (SuSE 10.3),
    which has been working just fine? (SuSE 10.3 installed a 2.6.22.5
    kernel, and I want to compile a 2.6.25.6.

    I ask this question because I've tried going with the old initrd and
    my system hangs almost immediately after I select the new kernel from
    the grub menu.

  2. Re: Do I need a new initrd?

    strnbrg wrote:
    > If I want to compile (and then boot into) a new kernel, is it
    > necessary that I make a new initrd too? Or can I stick with the
    > (working) initrd that came with my Linux distribution (SuSE 10.3),
    > which has been working just fine? (SuSE 10.3 installed a 2.6.22.5
    > kernel, and I want to compile a 2.6.25.6.


    Kernel modules stored in initrd are specificly for the kernel the initrd was
    made with, so yep, you'll need to mkinitrd...

    UNLESS... you compile your kernel with the things required for booting
    compiled INTO the kernel, rather than as modules.

    If you do that, you shouldn't need an initrd at all.

    > I ask this question because I've tried going with the old initrd and
    > my system hangs almost immediately after I select the new kernel from
    > the grub menu.


    It will, none of the modules will work, they're linked to the old kernel.
    that means no filesystem (ext3), possibly no sata drivers, no framebuffer,
    etc etc etc...
    --
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
    | | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
    | Andrew Halliwell BSc | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
    | in |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
    | Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |

  3. Re: Do I need a new initrd?

    On 30 Jun, 23:29, Andrew Halliwell wrote:
    > strnbrg wrote:
    > > If I want to compile (and then boot into) a new kernel, is it
    > > necessary that I make a new initrd too? *Or can I stick with the
    > > (working) initrd that came with my Linux distribution (SuSE 10.3),
    > > which has been working just fine? *(SuSE 10.3 installed a 2.6.22.5
    > > kernel, and I want to compile a 2.6.25.6.

    >
    > Kernel modules stored in initrd are specificly for the kernel the initrd was
    > made with, so yep, you'll need to mkinitrd...
    >
    > UNLESS... you compile your kernel with the things required for booting
    > compiled INTO the kernel, rather than as modules.


    Doing this for SuSE is awkward: the 'YaST' GUI is absolutely awful
    about dealing with multiple kernels, especially home-grown kernels,
    and tends to flush your old kernel when doing RPM kernel updates. I
    ran into this a lote with SuSE 9.x.

+ Reply to Thread