From 2.4.9 to CVS ???

[Patrick Allaire]

No I dont have 'bad cramfs magic' !!! I tought it could be the case ... but
I looked at the mkcramfs.c from the 2.4.9 and 2.4.17 version and there is no
difference So the generated code should be the same.

Patrick Allaire
mailto:pallaire at gameloft.com
If you can see it, but it's not there, it's virtual. 
If you can't see it, but it is there, it's hidden. 
It you can't see it and it isn't there, it's gone.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Björn Eriksson [mailto:mdeans at algonet.se]
> Sent: January 4, 2002 11:40 AM
> To: linux-mtd at lists.infradead.org
> Subject: Re: From 2.4.9 to CVS ???
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 11:19:13AM -0500, Patrick Allaire wrote:
> > Every thing is compiled fine ... at boot up, MTD 
> find(probe) my flash, it
> > printout the partioning it will do ... after that I get 
> > 
> > VFS: Mounted root (cramfs filesystem) readonly.
> > Freeing unused kernel memory : 36k freed
> > Kernel panic: No init found....
> > 
> > 
> > I know from the last line that the problems is that the 
> kernel cannot find
> > /sbin/init ... but it is there, it is exactly the same 
> cramfs I used on
> > 2.4.9 when it was working !!! To be sure it was not 
> corrupted, I redid the
> > flashing of the /dev/mtdblock0 with my cramfs file ... with the same
> > results.
> 
>  Are you sure you're not getting a 'bad cramfs magic' as 
> well? I know I
> did when I tried booting a 2.4.9 cramfs-initrd with a 2.4.17 kernel.
> Anyways, read fs/cramfs/README:
> 
>   <<The disadvantage is that the generated cramfs cannot always be
>     shared between different kernels, not even necessarily kernels of
>     the same architecture if PAGE_CACHE_SIZE is subject to change
>     between kernel versions.>>
> 
> 
> -- 
> //Björnen
>