From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] gnu: %default-extra-linux-options: Remove redundant
	options.
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 14:35:22 +0200
Message-ID: <871t026fzp.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <20160926103447.31830-1-david@craven.ch>
	<20160926103447.31830-2-david@craven.ch> <87r3839jzb.fsf@gnu.org>
	<CAL1_im=W+37GX-dLFMB_6modUk8a-ubs+QtV6uG+BzCTASvVkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAL1_imnzbV7w_UMdgW-ApXzpjoh1edyWSEKrxiH9VoS4Cbn86Q@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48777)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1bpaYl-0006rB-Bu
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 08:35:35 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1bpaYf-00042J-V0
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 08:35:31 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CAL1_imnzbV7w_UMdgW-ApXzpjoh1edyWSEKrxiH9VoS4Cbn86Q@mail.gmail.com>
	(David Craven's message of "Thu, 29 Sep 2016 12:33:17 +0200")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: David Craven <david@craven.ch>
Cc: guix-devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>

David Craven <david@craven.ch> skribis:

>>> I think we need to revert this patch.  Could you please look at it?
>
> m and y aren't equivalent after all. The default initrd requires these
> to be modules.
>
> So there are two options, revert the patch or change the y's to m's.
>
> I think your're right. I can revert it and add a comment saying why
> they are needed.

Right, thanks for the quick response!

I think it=E2=80=99s best to have them as modules, because I imagine one wo=
uld
want to avoid loading them when the system runs on the bare metal.

Ludo=E2=80=99.