On Tue, Jul 04, 2006 at 02:29:10PM +0400, Michael Tokarev wrote:
Why to test for udev at all? If the device does not exist, regardless
because udev whas what was giving me pains :)
if udev is running or not, it might be a good idea to try to create it.
Because IT IS NEEDED, period. Whenever the operation fails or not, and
i believe we can set autof to 2 by default.
whenever we fail if it fails or not - it's another question, and I think
that w/o explicit auto=yes, we may ignore create error and try to continue,
and with auto=yes, we fail on create error.
we need to distinguish between explicit auto=no, explicit auto=yes and
implicit auto=yes for this. maybe this is overkill
as it does now. If /dev/whatever exist, use it. If not, create it (unless,
perhaps, auto=no is specified) directly with proper mknod("/dev/mdX"), but
don't try to use some temporary names in /dev or elsewhere.
agreed!
L.
--
Luca Berra -- bluca@xxxxxxxxxx
Communication Media & Services S.r.l.
/"\
\ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN
X AGAINST HTML MAIL
/ \
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
