Talk:Initial ramdisk

message: About creation of an initrd image - it's just "cpio | gzip" of a directory (or a FS image). That directory should contain an executable program called "init" (will get back to this later) and anything else that program depends on. It should usually NOT be a full-fledged OS - just enough stuff that can fit into RAM while still leaving space for the rest of the system.
Amos Shapira 04:16, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  creation of an initrd image 

message: The article seems to be unsure of how a linux system actually boots, as I understand it (working from the source of the kernel!) The following happens.
1. The kernel itself is loaded into memory (optionally with a ramdisc image.)
2. The kernel concocts a very simple pre-boot file system, including a /dev
3. The kernel mounts the root file-system and performs a root_pivot (kernel version of chroot.)
4. The kernel then calls init, which controls the rest of the boot process.
The article at the moment indicates that the linux kernel _typically_ doesn't contain "all the code needed to load the system.".  While some features ARE placed in modules, these tend not to be the ones you need for mounting the root file system.  Using initrd it IS possible to place those features in modules.  Unless someone can give me a good reason why not, I'll rewrite large chunks of this article in 24 hours time.
Scruffy brit 16:04, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misrepresentation of the linux architecture and boot process 

message: … since this article describes both, and initramfs redirects here.  —Fleminra 21:29, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  propose move to "initrd and initramfs" 

message: Can I suggest that this article be greatly simplified, have terms described, and have examples added. As it stands it may be accurate but only usable by somebody who already understands all the terms used - i.e. by somebody who doesn't need it. A case in point is the description of root and pivot. An example of the code we need to use to specify the (temporary ? or real ?) root would be meaningful. It left me mystified, and I still don't know what goes in initrd or how to create it. Please not I'm not criticising or nitpicking here, it's good that you guys have contributed this, I'm just trying to provide constructive feedback. Rcbutcher (talk) 05:52, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: This article needs to be Dumbed Down to be useful

message: Based on http://www.mjmwired.net/kernel/Documentation/filesystems/ramfs-rootfs-initramfs.txt, which was definately at least once true, although it might not still be true, the kernel always uses an initramfs. The CPIO archive is embedded in the kernel image. It may be empty. The kernel can optionally be passed an external cpio file, whose contents are merged with the internal one. If the built-in initramfs archive does not contain the necessary components, and no external initramfs is available to merge in, then legacy code for loading an initrd is used. If that fails, booting from a physical disc directly is attempted.
In theory then the kernel image can contain the complete OS, by using the built-in cpio archive. This is very different from an initrd, which always requires a separate file. 71.2.110.57 (talk) 17:30, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Initramfs section far from complete. 

message: This article should compare the approach it describes with other operating systems' methods of solving the same problem.  (Assuming that they have the same problem.)  In FreeBSD this is generally the responsibility of /boot/loader; what does Solaris do?  How about Microsoft Windows?  QNX?  Were there similar problems on other hardware architectures, or is this specific to PC-style systems?  18.26.0.5 (talk) 19:52, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure that would be helpful, because—from what I know—other operating systems have simpler boot processes with no straightforward analogue to an initramfs.  Maybe a separate article on boot processes would be a good idea. —213.239.210.250 (talk) 13:58, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too much "inside-world" perspective 

message: The article Linux startup process is extremely relevant to this article, and helps to clarify what it being said here.  I'd suggest throwing a link to "Linux startup process" somewhere.  I'd do it myself, but I'm not sure exactly where I should place it (a "see also" section at bottom?  A "see also" at top?  A summary of the Linux startup process, with "for further reading, see..."?) so that it won't be edited away in a matter of days.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.250.247.113 (talk) 08:34, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: . Your suggestions of where to put that link would have been fine, but I decided to use the Wikipedia: summary style approach instead: the lead sentence of the child article includes a link to the parent article; a section in the parent article includes a  template link to the child article. --DavidCary (talk) 17:10, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion: reference to article "Linux startup process" 

message: Maybe someone could introduce mkinitcpio into the article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.49.225.210 (talk) 16:03, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  mkinitcpio 

message: I suggest merging the article initramfs into this article initrd.
While they are distinctly different pieces of software,
I suspect a single article that covers both,
including a few paragraphs that point out exactly what is the difference between them,
will serve our readers better than
two separate articles.
--DavidCary (talk) 15:34, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge 

message: The article claims that /init is launched, can we get a reference for this? I only know https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/5125991c9a9360fbdb717e22783c970bbd140660/init/main.c#L959 and it doesn't mention that path. --Ysangkok (talk) 12:05, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello!  It's about the initramfs scheme please see https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/filesystems/ramfs-rootfs-initramfs.txt, which the article already uses as a reference. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 13:21, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  <tt>/init</tt> vs <tt>/sbin/init</tt> 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Initrd. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080724162809/http://www.linuxsymposium.org/2000/booting.php to http://www.linuxsymposium.org/2000/booting.php
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/Linux-For-Devices-Articles/Introducing-initramfs-a-new-model-for-initial-RAM-disks/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/Linux-For-Devices-Articles/Introducing-initramfs-a-new-model-for-initial-RAM-disks/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:12, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I find two sentences unclear.
In the part "Similarities in other operating systems": "the Windows boot loader is capable of loading the .sys files for boot-time kernel modules itself, which is the task that requires initrd in Linux." - you mean the Windows kernel?
In "Mount preparations": "any maintenance tasks that cannot run on a mounted root file system are done, the root file system is mounted read-only" - the first 'mounted' is read-write? It's not clear from the article (and I thought that it's read only as well).
Yaroslav Nikitenko (talk) 13:18, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please explain more