Fwd: Ubuntu initramfs (Was: Re: any reason for CONFIG_FUSE_FS=y)

[Aaron Rainbolt]

Bah, sent directly to a Canonical employee rather than a mailing list.
Why does Gmail keep doing this? grr...

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Aaron Rainbolt <arraybolt3 at gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 12:18 PM
Subject: Re: Ubuntu initramfs (Was: Re: any reason for CONFIG_FUSE_FS=y)
To: Dimitri John Ledkov <dimitri.ledkov at canonical.com>


On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 12:09 PM Dimitri John Ledkov
<dimitri.ledkov at canonical.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 9 Aug 2022 at 17:53, Richard Laager <rlaager at wiktel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 8/9/22 11:38, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> > > The fast majority of Ubuntu installations boot without initramfs at
> > > all.
> >
> > What makes you say this? Every Ubuntu system I've ever installed has an
> > initrd.img-KERNEL_VERSION in /boot. In this context, I'm talking about
> > systems installed using the stock installers (primarily server, but
> > desktop was that way last I installed one using the stock installer).
> >
>
> We always generate initrd.img and use it as fallback if/when
> initrd-less boot fails. The vast majority of Ubuntu boots are
> successful without initrd, for example almost all Ubuntu Public Cloud
> images.
>
> --
> okurrr,
>
> Dimitri

On my system, if the initrd isn't readable by the kernel, it results
in a kernel panic. Is that to be expected despite inird-less boot? Or
is that an indicator that at least Lubuntu (and probably Ubuntu
Desktop) does use an initrd?