On Sat, Mar 16, 2002 at 12:30:18AM -0500, Jeff Dike wrote:
> mdz@... said:
> > I recently uploaded rootstrap to Debian unstable. I wanted a tool to
> > quickly and easily create Debian root filesystems for UML, and ended
> > up polishing it a little and releasing it. It uses UML and a tiny
> > cramfs filesystem to bootstrap itself, so the entire process can be
> > done without root privileges (thanks to Jeff, who I believe gave me
> > that idea originally).
> Can you send me a set of values to stick in the table at the top of
> http://user-mode-linux.sf.net/fs_making.html (assuming you want an entry
> there :-) ?
I guess it would go something like this:
Most suitable for Debian users
Needs root/sudo No
Command line Yes
Sets up networking No
Sets up X No
> The rule for 'does your tool support Blah' is whether, when installing it
> and just running it, do you have the option of having the resulting
> filesystem do Blah?
I haven't put much effort into trying to make the resulting system do all
sorts of neat things, but just getting a filesystem built as quickly and
easily as possible. I just now added an option to the debian module to have
it install additional packages after everything is set up, and that will
essentially provide X. Network setup could presumably be done based on the
configuration supplied for installation, but I haven't bothered with it.
> Also a little blurb that I can use further down the page would be good.
> Otherwise, I'll just cons one up from this announcement.
Looking at the things that are there, I guess the only thing interesting
about rootstrap at this point is that it can build Debian systems. I guess
a blurb about it being new and under development would be appropriate.
All of these kinds of tools would benefit from a generalized virtual
networking facility, like the one that we discussed a while back. I really
haven't had the time to sit down and write it, but it would make it possible
to build a filesystem for UML with no configuration at all. This is
currently possible with rootstrap, but only if you have a local copy of all
of the necessary packages. Downloading them from a network is probably much
more common, but requires that network configuration data be specified.
I'm thinking about limiting the scope of the hypothetical tool so that I can
actually get it done in a free hour. It really only needs to read a config
file with a list of users and IP addresses in order to be useful; the rest
of the functionality (generalizing the host side into a library) can wait.