Re: advice needed for gentoo bug involving lvm2/udev

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 03:09:34AM +0200, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 18:41, William Hubbs <w.d.hubbs@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > we have the following bug posted in gentoo's bugzilla:
> >
> > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=365227.
> >
> > The reporter is telling me that we should use --action=change instead of
> > --action=add in the cold boot sequence when dev is devtmpfs. However,
> > this doesn't seem to be the correct fix based on earlier discussions on
> > this list.
> >
> > Does anyone else have any suggestions for fixing this? My thought is
> > that the rules for lvm2 should be fixed. What does everyone else think?
> 
> --action=add is still the recommended and default way of doing coldplug.
> 
> It should only be done once after udevd is started though, and never
> again. All later triggers should be change only.

The reporter is now saying that --action=add does not touch nodes that
are already in the file system, so, for example, if you mount devtmpfs
on /dev then call udevadm trigger --action=add, the permissions,
ownership, etc, of nodes that already exist are not touched. So, he is
suggesting that we add another udevadm trigger call with --action=change
to the cold boot sequence.

Is this a bug in udev, or should we add this extra udevadm trigger call?

William

Attachment: pgp2JqLLHjAcH.pgp
Description: PGP signature


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux DVB]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [X.org]     [Util Linux NG]     [Fedora Women]     [ALSA Devel]     [Linux USB]

  Powered by Linux