ramfs vs tmpfs

Jeremy Huntwork jhuntwork at linuxfromscratch.org
Sat Jun 25 10:45:07 PDT 2005

Archaic wrote:
> I would have agreed with you before glibc required tmpfs to pass it's
> checks and shared memory became common. Are you aware of any popular
> distro that *doesn't* include tmpfs in the default configuration?
> The reason is that the bootscripts use tmpfs, so when explaining the
> manual mounting of /dev at the beginning of chapter6 it would be nice to
> explain it how it will be done at bootup without having to explain why
> we aren't doing it that way during the manual phase.
> This might be a good time to specify enabling tmpfs in the kernel page
> where hotplug is explicitly mentioned. I'll BZ this.

If we can be confident that the majority of host systems will natively 
support tmpfs (which it certainly appears we can) and the change of 
command offers the same (or better) functionality, then I see no reason 
not to change it.  It would also, perhaps in a small way, prepare the 
reader for using a tmpfs and understanding what it is. If and when they 
start editing their bootscripts, they won't be surprised to see it used 


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list