Package: linux-image-3.2.0-1-4kc-malta
Version: 3.2.4-1
Severity: wishlist

I've installed a mips system within qemu using the debian installer image for
this architecture. Unfortunately the installer's default filesystem type ext4
is not built-in into the kernel image, which makes it very hard to boot the
system after installation.

Please change ext4 support from module to built-in for this kernel, as it's done
for ext2 and ext3.

thanks
WM

-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=de_AT.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_AT.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120219093201.6443.54631.reportbug@wmiwilli">http ://lists.debian.org/20120219093201.6443.54631.reportbug@wmiwilli

On Sun, 2012-02-19 at 10:32 +0100, Willi Mann wrote:
> Package: linux-image-3.2.0-1-4kc-malta
> Version: 3.2.4-1
> Severity: wishlist
>
> I've installed a mips system within qemu using the debian installer image for
> this architecture. Unfortunately the installer's default filesystem type ext4
> is not built-in into the kernel image, which makes it very hard to boot the
> system after installation.

This change is welcome, but I would have appreciated advance notice.

> Please change ext4 support from module to built-in for this kernel, as it's done
> for ext2 and ext3.

If ext4 is going to be built-in then it seems like we should disable
ext2 and ext3 and enable CONFIG_EXT4_USE_FOR_EXT23.

Ben.

--
Ben Hutchings
Every program is either trivial or else contains at least one bug

reassign 660446 src:linux-2.6 3.2.4-1
quit

Ben Hutchings wrote:

> If ext4 is going to be built-in then it seems like we should disable
> ext2 and ext3 and enable CONFIG_EXT4_USE_FOR_EXT23.

I'd be all for doing that (except the building-in part) on all arches,
fwiw.



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120219213901.GJ3657@burratino">http://lists.debian.org/20120219213901.GJ3657@burratino

On Sun, 2012-02-19 at 15:39 -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> reassign 660446 src:linux-2.6 3.2.4-1
> quit
>
> Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
> > If ext4 is going to be built-in then it seems like we should disable
> > ext2 and ext3 and enable CONFIG_EXT4_USE_FOR_EXT23.
>
> I'd be all for doing that (except the building-in part) on all arches,
> fwiw.

That costs an extra 170K of memory on systems that only use ext3, though
(and an extra 250K on those that only use ext2).

Ben.

--
Ben Hutchings
Every program is either trivial or else contains at least one bug

Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-02-19 at 15:39 -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> Ben Hutchings wrote:

>>> If ext4 is going to be built-in then it seems like we should disable
>>> ext2 and ext3 and enable CONFIG_EXT4_USE_FOR_EXT23.
>>
>> I'd be all for doing that (except the building-in part) on all arches,
>> fwiw.
>
> That costs an extra 170K of memory on systems that only use ext3, though
> (and an extra 250K on those that only use ext2).

Oh, good point. On platforms like amd64 where that wouldn't matter,
it's easy enough to request the ext4 driver explicitly, so never mind.

Thanks for a sanity check.
Jonathan



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120219220300.GK3657@burratino">http://lists.debian.org/20120219220300.GK3657@burratino

On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 10:32:01AM +0100, Willi Mann wrote:
> Please change ext4 support from module to built-in for this kernel, as it's done
> for ext2 and ext3.

m68k is also affected. No initramfs, but ext2/ext3 built-in. I'll change
that also.

Bastian

--
You canna change the laws of physics, Captain; I've got to have thirty minutes!



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120222232537.GA26406@wavehammer.waldi.eu.org">ht tp://lists.debian.org/20120222232537.GA26406@wavehammer.waldi.eu.org

Bastian Blank dixit:

>m68k is also affected. No initramfs, but ext2/ext3 built-in. I'll change
>that also.

Uhm, I politely disagree. Why? Why add ext4fs but not, say,
reiserfs? (I recently found myself in the situation of having
created an unbootable system, but that was easy to fix.)

On the other hand, klibc in testing has m68k support and
looks working; busybox is built. What more is needed for
this initrd stuff? This could also help systems with low
ST-RAM boot.

@porters: are there subarchitectures that cannot deal with
loading an initrd as part of the normal bootstrap?

bye,
//mirabilos (yes, mksh built against klibc on m68k even works)
--
FWIW, I'm quite impressed with mksh interactively. I thought it was much
*much* more bare bones. But it turns out it beats the living hell out of
ksh93 in that respect. I'd even consider it for my daily use if I hadn't
wasted half my life on my zsh setup. :-) -- Frank Terbeck in #!/bin/mksh



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: Pine.BSM.4.64L.1202222346550.8750@herc.mirbsd.org" >http://lists.debian.org/Pine.BSM.4.64L.1202222346550.8750@herc.mirbsd.org

On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 11:49:19PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Uhm, I politely disagree. Why? Why add ext4fs but not,

The same as for mips. No initrd, but d-i uses ext4 as default now.

> @porters: are there subarchitectures that cannot deal with
> loading an initrd as part of the normal bootstrap?

Currently m68k is marked as no initrd support. I will glad to change
this after someone tells me to.

Bastian

--
War is never imperative.
-- McCoy, "Balance of Terror", stardate 1709.2



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120223001300.GA27084@wavehammer.waldi.eu.org">ht tp://lists.debian.org/20120223001300.GA27084@wavehammer.waldi.eu.org

Thorsten Glaser wrote:

> Why? Why add ext4fs but not, say,
> reiserfs?

The rationale is that ext4 is what d-i defaults to in wheezy. Getting
a non-bootable system after installing with default settings is no
fun. I'm not sure if d-i on m68k even works for wheezy yet, though,
which might make that moot.

Jonathan



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120223001416.GA4092@burratino">http://lists.debian.org/20120223001416.GA4092@burratino

Jonathan Nieder dixit:

>Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>
>> Why? Why add ext4fs but not, say,
>> reiserfs?
>
>The rationale is that ext4 is what d-i defaults to in wheezy. Getting

Ah okay, that explains things. This sucks. OK, then that change
is probably the best in the very short term.

>fun. I'm not sure if d-i on m68k even works for wheezy yet, though,

It does. Wouter and, until some time ago apparently, Stephen
have kept it working. (Well, for amiga/atari/mac, but that’s
probably most of the population.) At least this I’m being told.

bye,
//mirabilos
--
“Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having
a peeing section in a swimming pool.�
-- Edward Burr



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: Pine.BSM.4.64L.1202230053300.8750@herc.mirbsd.org" >http://lists.debian.org/Pine.BSM.4.64L.1202230053300.8750@herc.mirbsd.org