Re: [gentoo-user] Re: 4 machines - no /dev/cdrom or /dev/dvd anymore

[Michael Mol <mikemol@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2591 bytes --]

On Jan 7, 2013 8:08 PM, "Mark Knecht" <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 3:25 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > On Mon, 7 Jan 2013 09:37:05 -0800
> > Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Now, my point is that change to /dev/srX was the root cause is FUD. It
> >> isn't the root cause of this change because it didn't change on my
> >> systems. All I know is that ID_PATH (from the old file) used to work
> >> and no longer does. Whatever is responsible for creating that, likely
> >> some portion of the kernel, changed the value and created a need to
> >> modify how udev looks at the system. Is it a bug? I don't know.  It's
> >> just the way it is.
> >
> >
> > It's not a bug as /dev/dvd is a mere convenience for the user - a
> > nickname if you will. You are highly unlikely to find a standards doc
> > of any kind stating the symlink should be there. Which means if it's
> > not there, you get to make your own convenient nicknames.
> >
> > /dev/harddrive has never existed, right? Same with /dev/dvd and
> > friends. make them if you want, but you can't expect them to be there
> > and their absence is not a bug.
> >
> > Obviously someone left them out of the rules files. Maybe they had a
> > reason, maybe they got lazy. Either way you get to add your own rules
> > to get the names YOU want.
> >
> > It really is as simple as that, don't overthink this one.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Alan McKinnon
> > alan.mckinnon@gmail.com
> >
> >
>
> Alan,
>    While I don't completely disagree with your POV, let's at least
> agree that it is nothing other than your POV. I have a different one,
> but as it's mine it's clearly of little interest or value.
>
>    I really don't see why I'm the one getting banged on here but
> that's life sometimes. I saw a problem for a couple of months. It
> frustrated me but not enough to do anything about it. Solving it
> finally bubbled up high enough on my list that I finally asked if
> others were having the same problem. (which they were, and which they
> also considered a problem) Before anyone had actually answered me I
> had posted one way that folks who cared could fix it. I thought I was
> doing the community a small service by getting a little bit of
> technically positive info out there. I guess not in this case.
>
>    Sorry for wasting bandwidth. I suspect it's time for me to
> unsubscribe and just read gentoo-user in a list somewhere. Sad, but
> flotsam & jetsam I suppose...
>
> Over an out,
> Mark
>

Eh. Please stick around. Udev is a polarizing issue wherever it pops up.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3499 bytes --]