From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1R38XW-0002d1-Gc for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 15:35:20 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E4F5EE0767; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 15:35:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7873C21C15E for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 15:33:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 12 Sep 2011 15:33:37 -0000 Received: from p5B083DA8.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO pc.localnet) [91.8.61.168] by mail.gmx.net (mp011) with SMTP; 12 Sep 2011 17:33:37 +0200 X-Authenticated: #13997268 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+VYJ0DJLuVNN1OTp79KlDDaWrEWwTsrErgnefuLi vTbu7E/C4SUsZt From: Michael Schreckenbauer To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] udev + /usr Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 17:33:34 +0200 Message-ID: <2874055.6JTUjtRtEH@pc> User-Agent: KMail/4.7.1 (Linux/2.6.38-gentoo; KDE/4.7.1; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20110912150248.GB3599@acm.acm> References: <20110912150248.GB3599@acm.acm> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: e9286fed5795adb11ecaa9f8e2eed3ca Hi Alan, On Monday, 12. September 2011 15:02:48 Alan Mackenzie wrote: > Hi, everybody. > > Hope nobody minds me starting a new thread with an accurate name. > > Which version of udev is it that has this nauseating feature of needing > /usr loaded to boot? > Somewhere in that version's source will be several (or lots of) "/usr". > Just how difficult is it going to be to replace "/usr/bin" with "/bin" > throughout the source? you misunderstood something. udev is able to run arbitrary scripts. Some of those scripts are located in /usr/* or need something there. I doubt you will find references to /usr in the udev-sources. > udev is part of the kernel. No. udev is usperspace. > How come the kernel hackers aren't up in > arms about this as much as we are? Or are they, maybe? In which case, > maybe the kernel people would welcome an option to disrequire the early > mounting of /usr as much as we would. > > Anyhow, I'd like to take a peek at the source code which does this evil > thing. Would somebody please tell me which version of udev is involved. Every udev version works this way. Fixing udev to continue working with separate /usr is far from trivial imo. Changing some paths is not the way to go for sure. First of all, udev has to distinguish between "device not present" and "script error of some kind". Failing scripts have to be queued somehow for later execution. If a script keeps failing, it has to be removed from that queue, with a message to syslog or something like that. If udev needs a script in /usr/* to mount /usr then there's a chicken-egg-problem, which could be hard to solve (if possible at all without moving things from /usr/ to /). Note, that I am wild guessing here, I did not study the udev sources or any related script/rule :) > Thanks. Best, Michael