Does the Linux kernel need a file system to run?2019 Community Moderator ElectionDoes Android really use the same kernel as Linux?How to configure Linux to cache file metadata in preference to contents?File system that never breaks (data loss acceptable)When do I need to specify add_efi_memmap as kernel argument in UEFI/EFI boot?What files does the Linux kernel access?Root file system vs partition's file systemWhat parts of the Linux kernel I do not need?Linux/Embedded Linux - Understanding the Kernel and additional BSP specific componentsHow do I run the Linux kernel?Why does the Linux kernel build system use incremental linking or ar T thin archives?
Why is it that I can sometimes guess the next note?
What's the name of the logical fallacy where a debater extends a statement far beyond the original statement to make it true?
Is there a RAID 0 Equivalent for RAM?
Why Shazam when there is already Superman?
I found an audio circuit and I built it just fine, but I find it a bit too quiet. How do I amplify the output so that it is a bit louder?
Does the Linux kernel need a file system to run?
What is the highest possible scrabble score for placing a single tile
How to draw a matrix with arrows in limited space
Why is the Sun approximated as a black body at ~ 5800 K?
How to create a paid keyvalue store
Delete multiple columns using awk or sed
15% tax on $7.5k earnings. Is that right?
How can I write humor as character trait?
What fields between the rationals and the reals allow a good notion of 2D distance?
Which Article Helped Get Rid of Technobabble in RPGs?
Is it allowed to activate the ability of multiple planeswalkers in a single turn?
Has the laser at Magurele, Romania reached a tenth of the Sun's power?
Showing a sum is positive
Mimic lecturing on blackboard, facing audience
Giving feedback to someone without sounding prejudiced
Are Captain Marvel's powers affected by Thanos breaking the Tesseract and claiming the stone?
What are some good ways to treat frozen vegetables such that they behave like fresh vegetables when stir frying them?
How to explain what's wrong with this application of the chain rule?
Does the reader need to like the PoV character?
Does the Linux kernel need a file system to run?
2019 Community Moderator ElectionDoes Android really use the same kernel as Linux?How to configure Linux to cache file metadata in preference to contents?File system that never breaks (data loss acceptable)When do I need to specify add_efi_memmap as kernel argument in UEFI/EFI boot?What files does the Linux kernel access?Root file system vs partition's file systemWhat parts of the Linux kernel I do not need?Linux/Embedded Linux - Understanding the Kernel and additional BSP specific componentsHow do I run the Linux kernel?Why does the Linux kernel build system use incremental linking or ar T thin archives?
My opinion is yes, it does, because all useful exposure to the outside world (non-priviledged processor mode) would first require a process running in the outside world. That would require a file system, even a temporary, in-RAM, file system.
Another engineer disagrees with me, but I can't seem to prove this beyond all (unknown to me) cases.
Does the answer to this question depend on the definition of 'running'?
filesystems linux-kernel
asked 8 hours ago
Peter L.Peter L.
1463
New contributor
Peter L. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
My opinion is yes, it does, because all useful exposure to the outside world (non-priviledged processor mode) would first require a process running in the outside world. That would require a file system, even a temporary, in-RAM, file system.
Another engineer disagrees with me, but I can't seem to prove this beyond all (unknown to me) cases.
Does the answer to this question depend on the definition of 'running'?
filesystems linux-kernel
asked 8 hours ago
Peter L.Peter L.
1463
New contributor
Peter L. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
i think that a running kernel does not "require"useful exposure to the outside world
– jsotola
7 hours ago
4
Brings to mind the old halted Linux firewall (circa 2002)
– Jeff Schaller
6 hours ago
If you add new code to the kernel, you can do anything. If you can't, it will initialize fine up to the point where it tries to runinit(the first user-space process), and that will fail.
– immibis
9 mins ago
add a comment |
My opinion is yes, it does, because all useful exposure to the outside world (non-priviledged processor mode) would first require a process running in the outside world. That would require a file system, even a temporary, in-RAM, file system.
Another engineer disagrees with me, but I can't seem to prove this beyond all (unknown to me) cases.
Does the answer to this question depend on the definition of 'running'?
filesystems linux-kernel
asked 8 hours ago
Peter L.Peter L.
1463
New contributor
Peter L. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
My opinion is yes, it does, because all useful exposure to the outside world (non-priviledged processor mode) would first require a process running in the outside world. That would require a file system, even a temporary, in-RAM, file system.
Another engineer disagrees with me, but I can't seem to prove this beyond all (unknown to me) cases.
Does the answer to this question depend on the definition of 'running'?
filesystems linux-kernel
filesystems linux-kernel
asked 8 hours ago
Peter L.Peter L.
1463
New contributor
Peter L. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 8 hours ago
Peter L.Peter L.
1463
New contributor
Peter L. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 8 hours ago
Peter L.Peter L.
1463
New contributor
Peter L. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 8 hours ago
Peter L.Peter L.
1463
asked 8 hours ago
Peter L.Peter L.
1463
1463
New contributor
Peter L. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Peter L. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Peter L. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
i think that a running kernel does not "require"useful exposure to the outside world
– jsotola
7 hours ago
4
Brings to mind the old halted Linux firewall (circa 2002)
– Jeff Schaller
6 hours ago
If you add new code to the kernel, you can do anything. If you can't, it will initialize fine up to the point where it tries to runinit(the first user-space process), and that will fail.
– immibis
9 mins ago
add a comment |
i think that a running kernel does not "require"useful exposure to the outside world
– jsotola
7 hours ago
4
Brings to mind the old halted Linux firewall (circa 2002)
– Jeff Schaller
6 hours ago
If you add new code to the kernel, you can do anything. If you can't, it will initialize fine up to the point where it tries to runinit(the first user-space process), and that will fail.
– immibis
9 mins ago
i think that a running kernel does not "require"
useful exposure to the outside world– jsotola
7 hours ago
i think that a running kernel does not "require"
useful exposure to the outside world– jsotola
7 hours ago
4
4
Brings to mind the old halted Linux firewall (circa 2002)
– Jeff Schaller
6 hours ago
Brings to mind the old halted Linux firewall (circa 2002)
– Jeff Schaller
6 hours ago
If you add new code to the kernel, you can do anything. If you can't, it will initialize fine up to the point where it tries to run
init (the first user-space process), and that will fail.– immibis
9 mins ago
If you add new code to the kernel, you can do anything. If you can't, it will initialize fine up to the point where it tries to run
init (the first user-space process), and that will fail.– immibis
9 mins ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
That's rather an odd question because you don't run the kernel like you run a program. The kernel is a platform to run programs on. Of course there is setup and shutdown code but it's not possible to run the kernel on its own. There must always be a main "init" process. And the kernel will panic if it's not there. If init tries to exit the kernel will also panic.
These days the init process is something like systemd. If not otherwise specified the kernel will try to run a program starting with /sbin/init. See the init Param here http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/bootparam.7.html in an emergency you can boot Linux with init=/bin/bash . But notice how you always specify a file on the file system to run.
So the kernel will panic if it starts up an has no file system because without one there is no way to load init.
Some confusion may arise because of a chicken and egg situation where the kernel must load drivers to access it's file system. To get round this an initial ramdisk is loaded from an image on disk containing vital drivers and setup scripts. These are executed before the file system is loaded. But make no mistake the initial ramdisk is itself a file system.
answered 6 hours ago
Philip CoulingPhilip Couling
2,061920
Isn't there a condition where the kernel gives up trying to initialize hardware and load a known file system (not initrd passed into the kernel via init params), then drops into a very limited shell (without init=/bin/bash)? Also, since you bring up /bin/bash, would the kernel always have that minimal file system available, even if it was built with other .config options that could potentially eliminate this?
– Peter L.
6 hours ago
@PeterL. that limit shell is some shell from the initrd/initramfs/whatever that kernel booted with, IIRC.
– muru
4 hours ago
Note that you can build the initramfs (a CPIO archive that is extracted into a ramfs or tmpfs filesystem) into the kernel. Whether or not that counts as the kernel "needing a filesystem" is up to you, since it means you can boot the kernel and nothing but the kernel and have a functional (if a bit limited) system. Also note that, even if you patch the kernel to no longer require an init, it will still create internal virtual filesystems that are never exposed.
– forest
1 hour ago
add a comment |
In Linux, every device is a file, so you have to have a filesystem to run it.
answered 8 hours ago
K7AAYK7AAY
762825
6
But of course the device drivers exist inside the kernel irrespective of whether or not a device file points to them.
– Philip Couling
6 hours ago
2
Not every device is a file. Network interfaces (eth0,wlan0etc.) aren't, for example.
– Ruslan
2 hours ago
1
This is a common misconception. While in theory, everything is a file in UNIX and UNIX-like systems, it is only completely true for highly specialized systems like Plan 9 (though it is far more true than for Windows). For Linux, quite a few things are not files. This is getting more and more true as many drivers have begun to use netlink rather than ioctls on character devices (which are files).
– forest
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Peter L. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f507837%2fdoes-the-linux-kernel-need-a-file-system-to-run%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
That's rather an odd question because you don't run the kernel like you run a program. The kernel is a platform to run programs on. Of course there is setup and shutdown code but it's not possible to run the kernel on its own. There must always be a main "init" process. And the kernel will panic if it's not there. If init tries to exit the kernel will also panic.
These days the init process is something like systemd. If not otherwise specified the kernel will try to run a program starting with /sbin/init. See the init Param here http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/bootparam.7.html in an emergency you can boot Linux with init=/bin/bash . But notice how you always specify a file on the file system to run.
So the kernel will panic if it starts up an has no file system because without one there is no way to load init.
Some confusion may arise because of a chicken and egg situation where the kernel must load drivers to access it's file system. To get round this an initial ramdisk is loaded from an image on disk containing vital drivers and setup scripts. These are executed before the file system is loaded. But make no mistake the initial ramdisk is itself a file system.
answered 6 hours ago
Philip CoulingPhilip Couling
2,061920
Isn't there a condition where the kernel gives up trying to initialize hardware and load a known file system (not initrd passed into the kernel via init params), then drops into a very limited shell (without init=/bin/bash)? Also, since you bring up /bin/bash, would the kernel always have that minimal file system available, even if it was built with other .config options that could potentially eliminate this?
– Peter L.
6 hours ago
@PeterL. that limit shell is some shell from the initrd/initramfs/whatever that kernel booted with, IIRC.
– muru
4 hours ago
Note that you can build the initramfs (a CPIO archive that is extracted into a ramfs or tmpfs filesystem) into the kernel. Whether or not that counts as the kernel "needing a filesystem" is up to you, since it means you can boot the kernel and nothing but the kernel and have a functional (if a bit limited) system. Also note that, even if you patch the kernel to no longer require an init, it will still create internal virtual filesystems that are never exposed.
– forest
1 hour ago
add a comment |
That's rather an odd question because you don't run the kernel like you run a program. The kernel is a platform to run programs on. Of course there is setup and shutdown code but it's not possible to run the kernel on its own. There must always be a main "init" process. And the kernel will panic if it's not there. If init tries to exit the kernel will also panic.
These days the init process is something like systemd. If not otherwise specified the kernel will try to run a program starting with /sbin/init. See the init Param here http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/bootparam.7.html in an emergency you can boot Linux with init=/bin/bash . But notice how you always specify a file on the file system to run.
So the kernel will panic if it starts up an has no file system because without one there is no way to load init.
Some confusion may arise because of a chicken and egg situation where the kernel must load drivers to access it's file system. To get round this an initial ramdisk is loaded from an image on disk containing vital drivers and setup scripts. These are executed before the file system is loaded. But make no mistake the initial ramdisk is itself a file system.
answered 6 hours ago
Philip CoulingPhilip Couling
2,061920
Isn't there a condition where the kernel gives up trying to initialize hardware and load a known file system (not initrd passed into the kernel via init params), then drops into a very limited shell (without init=/bin/bash)? Also, since you bring up /bin/bash, would the kernel always have that minimal file system available, even if it was built with other .config options that could potentially eliminate this?
– Peter L.
6 hours ago
@PeterL. that limit shell is some shell from the initrd/initramfs/whatever that kernel booted with, IIRC.
– muru
4 hours ago
Note that you can build the initramfs (a CPIO archive that is extracted into a ramfs or tmpfs filesystem) into the kernel. Whether or not that counts as the kernel "needing a filesystem" is up to you, since it means you can boot the kernel and nothing but the kernel and have a functional (if a bit limited) system. Also note that, even if you patch the kernel to no longer require an init, it will still create internal virtual filesystems that are never exposed.
– forest
1 hour ago
add a comment |
That's rather an odd question because you don't run the kernel like you run a program. The kernel is a platform to run programs on. Of course there is setup and shutdown code but it's not possible to run the kernel on its own. There must always be a main "init" process. And the kernel will panic if it's not there. If init tries to exit the kernel will also panic.
These days the init process is something like systemd. If not otherwise specified the kernel will try to run a program starting with /sbin/init. See the init Param here http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/bootparam.7.html in an emergency you can boot Linux with init=/bin/bash . But notice how you always specify a file on the file system to run.
So the kernel will panic if it starts up an has no file system because without one there is no way to load init.
Some confusion may arise because of a chicken and egg situation where the kernel must load drivers to access it's file system. To get round this an initial ramdisk is loaded from an image on disk containing vital drivers and setup scripts. These are executed before the file system is loaded. But make no mistake the initial ramdisk is itself a file system.
answered 6 hours ago
Philip CoulingPhilip Couling
2,061920
That's rather an odd question because you don't run the kernel like you run a program. The kernel is a platform to run programs on. Of course there is setup and shutdown code but it's not possible to run the kernel on its own. There must always be a main "init" process. And the kernel will panic if it's not there. If init tries to exit the kernel will also panic.
These days the init process is something like systemd. If not otherwise specified the kernel will try to run a program starting with /sbin/init. See the init Param here http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/bootparam.7.html in an emergency you can boot Linux with init=/bin/bash . But notice how you always specify a file on the file system to run.
So the kernel will panic if it starts up an has no file system because without one there is no way to load init.
Some confusion may arise because of a chicken and egg situation where the kernel must load drivers to access it's file system. To get round this an initial ramdisk is loaded from an image on disk containing vital drivers and setup scripts. These are executed before the file system is loaded. But make no mistake the initial ramdisk is itself a file system.
answered 6 hours ago
Philip CoulingPhilip Couling
2,061920
edited 6 hours ago
answered 6 hours ago
Philip CoulingPhilip Couling
2,061920
answered 6 hours ago
Philip CoulingPhilip Couling
2,061920
answered 6 hours ago
Philip CoulingPhilip Couling
2,061920
2,061920
Isn't there a condition where the kernel gives up trying to initialize hardware and load a known file system (not initrd passed into the kernel via init params), then drops into a very limited shell (without init=/bin/bash)? Also, since you bring up /bin/bash, would the kernel always have that minimal file system available, even if it was built with other .config options that could potentially eliminate this?
– Peter L.
6 hours ago
@PeterL. that limit shell is some shell from the initrd/initramfs/whatever that kernel booted with, IIRC.
– muru
4 hours ago
Note that you can build the initramfs (a CPIO archive that is extracted into a ramfs or tmpfs filesystem) into the kernel. Whether or not that counts as the kernel "needing a filesystem" is up to you, since it means you can boot the kernel and nothing but the kernel and have a functional (if a bit limited) system. Also note that, even if you patch the kernel to no longer require an init, it will still create internal virtual filesystems that are never exposed.
– forest
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Isn't there a condition where the kernel gives up trying to initialize hardware and load a known file system (not initrd passed into the kernel via init params), then drops into a very limited shell (without init=/bin/bash)? Also, since you bring up /bin/bash, would the kernel always have that minimal file system available, even if it was built with other .config options that could potentially eliminate this?
– Peter L.
6 hours ago
@PeterL. that limit shell is some shell from the initrd/initramfs/whatever that kernel booted with, IIRC.
– muru
4 hours ago
Note that you can build the initramfs (a CPIO archive that is extracted into a ramfs or tmpfs filesystem) into the kernel. Whether or not that counts as the kernel "needing a filesystem" is up to you, since it means you can boot the kernel and nothing but the kernel and have a functional (if a bit limited) system. Also note that, even if you patch the kernel to no longer require an init, it will still create internal virtual filesystems that are never exposed.
– forest
1 hour ago
Isn't there a condition where the kernel gives up trying to initialize hardware and load a known file system (not initrd passed into the kernel via init params), then drops into a very limited shell (without init=/bin/bash)? Also, since you bring up /bin/bash, would the kernel always have that minimal file system available, even if it was built with other .config options that could potentially eliminate this?
– Peter L.
6 hours ago
Isn't there a condition where the kernel gives up trying to initialize hardware and load a known file system (not initrd passed into the kernel via init params), then drops into a very limited shell (without init=/bin/bash)? Also, since you bring up /bin/bash, would the kernel always have that minimal file system available, even if it was built with other .config options that could potentially eliminate this?
– Peter L.
6 hours ago
@PeterL. that limit shell is some shell from the initrd/initramfs/whatever that kernel booted with, IIRC.
– muru
4 hours ago
@PeterL. that limit shell is some shell from the initrd/initramfs/whatever that kernel booted with, IIRC.
– muru
4 hours ago
Note that you can build the initramfs (a CPIO archive that is extracted into a ramfs or tmpfs filesystem) into the kernel. Whether or not that counts as the kernel "needing a filesystem" is up to you, since it means you can boot the kernel and nothing but the kernel and have a functional (if a bit limited) system. Also note that, even if you patch the kernel to no longer require an init, it will still create internal virtual filesystems that are never exposed.
– forest
1 hour ago
Note that you can build the initramfs (a CPIO archive that is extracted into a ramfs or tmpfs filesystem) into the kernel. Whether or not that counts as the kernel "needing a filesystem" is up to you, since it means you can boot the kernel and nothing but the kernel and have a functional (if a bit limited) system. Also note that, even if you patch the kernel to no longer require an init, it will still create internal virtual filesystems that are never exposed.
– forest
1 hour ago
add a comment |
In Linux, every device is a file, so you have to have a filesystem to run it.
answered 8 hours ago
K7AAYK7AAY
762825
6
But of course the device drivers exist inside the kernel irrespective of whether or not a device file points to them.
– Philip Couling
6 hours ago
2
Not every device is a file. Network interfaces (eth0,wlan0etc.) aren't, for example.
– Ruslan
2 hours ago
1
This is a common misconception. While in theory, everything is a file in UNIX and UNIX-like systems, it is only completely true for highly specialized systems like Plan 9 (though it is far more true than for Windows). For Linux, quite a few things are not files. This is getting more and more true as many drivers have begun to use netlink rather than ioctls on character devices (which are files).
– forest
1 hour ago
add a comment |
In Linux, every device is a file, so you have to have a filesystem to run it.
answered 8 hours ago
K7AAYK7AAY
762825
6
But of course the device drivers exist inside the kernel irrespective of whether or not a device file points to them.
– Philip Couling
6 hours ago
2
Not every device is a file. Network interfaces (eth0,wlan0etc.) aren't, for example.
– Ruslan
2 hours ago
1
This is a common misconception. While in theory, everything is a file in UNIX and UNIX-like systems, it is only completely true for highly specialized systems like Plan 9 (though it is far more true than for Windows). For Linux, quite a few things are not files. This is getting more and more true as many drivers have begun to use netlink rather than ioctls on character devices (which are files).
– forest
1 hour ago
add a comment |
In Linux, every device is a file, so you have to have a filesystem to run it.
answered 8 hours ago
K7AAYK7AAY
762825
In Linux, every device is a file, so you have to have a filesystem to run it.
answered 8 hours ago
K7AAYK7AAY
762825
answered 8 hours ago
K7AAYK7AAY
762825
answered 8 hours ago
K7AAYK7AAY
762825
answered 8 hours ago
K7AAYK7AAY
762825
762825
6
But of course the device drivers exist inside the kernel irrespective of whether or not a device file points to them.
– Philip Couling
6 hours ago
2
Not every device is a file. Network interfaces (eth0,wlan0etc.) aren't, for example.
– Ruslan
2 hours ago
1
This is a common misconception. While in theory, everything is a file in UNIX and UNIX-like systems, it is only completely true for highly specialized systems like Plan 9 (though it is far more true than for Windows). For Linux, quite a few things are not files. This is getting more and more true as many drivers have begun to use netlink rather than ioctls on character devices (which are files).
– forest
1 hour ago
add a comment |
6
But of course the device drivers exist inside the kernel irrespective of whether or not a device file points to them.
– Philip Couling
6 hours ago
2
Not every device is a file. Network interfaces (eth0,wlan0etc.) aren't, for example.
– Ruslan
2 hours ago
1
This is a common misconception. While in theory, everything is a file in UNIX and UNIX-like systems, it is only completely true for highly specialized systems like Plan 9 (though it is far more true than for Windows). For Linux, quite a few things are not files. This is getting more and more true as many drivers have begun to use netlink rather than ioctls on character devices (which are files).
– forest
1 hour ago
6
6
But of course the device drivers exist inside the kernel irrespective of whether or not a device file points to them.
– Philip Couling
6 hours ago
But of course the device drivers exist inside the kernel irrespective of whether or not a device file points to them.
– Philip Couling
6 hours ago
2
2
Not every device is a file. Network interfaces (
eth0, wlan0 etc.) aren't, for example.– Ruslan
2 hours ago
Not every device is a file. Network interfaces (
eth0, wlan0 etc.) aren't, for example.– Ruslan
2 hours ago
1
1
This is a common misconception. While in theory, everything is a file in UNIX and UNIX-like systems, it is only completely true for highly specialized systems like Plan 9 (though it is far more true than for Windows). For Linux, quite a few things are not files. This is getting more and more true as many drivers have begun to use netlink rather than ioctls on character devices (which are files).
– forest
1 hour ago
This is a common misconception. While in theory, everything is a file in UNIX and UNIX-like systems, it is only completely true for highly specialized systems like Plan 9 (though it is far more true than for Windows). For Linux, quite a few things are not files. This is getting more and more true as many drivers have begun to use netlink rather than ioctls on character devices (which are files).
– forest
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Peter L. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Peter L. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Peter L. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Peter L. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f507837%2fdoes-the-linux-kernel-need-a-file-system-to-run%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
i think that a running kernel does not "require"
useful exposure to the outside world– jsotola
7 hours ago
4
Brings to mind the old halted Linux firewall (circa 2002)
– Jeff Schaller
6 hours ago
If you add new code to the kernel, you can do anything. If you can't, it will initialize fine up to the point where it tries to run
init(the first user-space process), and that will fail.– immibis
9 mins ago