Alan Jenkins wrote:
On 9/28/09, Brendan Moran <bremoran@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Alan,
I'm using virtually the same startup script as is used in Ubuntu
(attached). It only uses $udevadm trigger, with no arguments.
Well, I'm sure you can narrow it down. You can always single-step the
init script on a running system to see what's happening.
It turns out it was pretty obvious:
-n Starting kernel event manager...
.
-n Loading hardware drivers...
[101] udev_monitor_enable_receiving: bind failed: No such file or
directory
error initializing netlink socket
[101] main: error initializing netlink socket
udevadm[102]: bind failed: No such file or directory
error: unable to subscribe to udev events
Checking the source, it appears that having
udev_monitor_enable_receiving fail means that
udev_monitor_new_from_netlink() is already failing. I imagine that I'm
missing a kernel config option, but I'm not sure what it is.
I didn't
expect that permissions would be an issue, as this system is running in
single user mode.
Mounting /dev as a tmpfs makes perfect sense to me, however I'll have to
do some hacking before I can modify that.
?
if [ -z $DEVMOUNT ]; then
# initramfs didn't mount /dev, so we'll need to do that
mount -n -t tmpfs -o mode=0755 udev /dev
fi
This will definitely cause some problems if you hadn't noticed it and
left /lib/udev/devices empty. Udev relies on /dev/null being present
at startup.
I think this is your main problem! Perhaps it is somehow responsible
for the later 'unknown: "uevent"' problem.
I've fixed the empty device list problem, so the failed bind is the
biggest problem now.
Thanks again,
Brendan
I have a list of all the
devices to be created and placed in /dev already. Currently, it's
expanded at compile time, but I should be able to change the target from
/dev to /lib/udev/devices.
One additional thing that I need to do while migrating away from a
static /dev is to convert our current naming scheme for devices to one
which is consistent with the naming that udev uses by default.
Thanks again,
Brendan
Good luck
Alan Jenkins wrote:
Hi
On 9/25/09, Brendan Moran <bremoran@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hotplug" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
