From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97FAB138351 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2013 01:16:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CE3CA21C033; Tue, 8 Jan 2013 01:16:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ob0-f178.google.com (mail-ob0-f178.google.com [209.85.214.178]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69A0021C033 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2013 01:15:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ob0-f178.google.com with SMTP id eh20so17935820obb.23 for ; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 17:15:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=2T9XP/AaEbGc/9yJSYFMizatykMwa6pjLhvvlYozEyA=; b=jOGmicwKXL/j/qeBXZvXFtjpnddXUSameb0lpzvctsJzTWBtQV+Qoac6+aMtswziWO wREd0htKt2BFCbsAI58OT/k0uxuJvcmghuqLL0NMC0f99IRVdc0J1BiYjPPO5yL8mMpu DUmXJ29i8AwF460NktsWyoYJfFzokhiutnNB3IN40LVwb5NNXOVcvhzOqpVA1iLrvyKX k9gAX7llbUbynMLuAdPGd+g6AVN7EpYDZRtbttJO4KongcCZI/yDpM1cOWZis4WPguoQ AhvkfuO3P7ZHVmo4V1ikPYpaVNHOuSomP/gNwdobmLB9gw0CHXQYoGjRy0HgV+tfJPFy h7SQ== 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 Received: by 10.60.172.164 with SMTP id bd4mr34273667oec.51.1357607710589; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 17:15:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.76.20.243 with HTTP; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 17:15:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.76.20.243 with HTTP; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 17:15:10 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <201301061119.56710.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> <50EA2364.4080604@gmail.com> <20130108012533.04004d12@khamul.example.com> Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 20:15:10 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: 4 machines - no /dev/cdrom or /dev/dvd anymore From: Michael Mol To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec54c4fca55842404d2bcad29 X-Archives-Salt: c9f5df1e-1f7f-4e35-b139-3e65eedbbb61 X-Archives-Hash: a94639e3a1f747d9ba9eb1e1f8fdf91e --bcaec54c4fca55842404d2bcad29 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Jan 7, 2013 8:08 PM, "Mark Knecht" wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 3:25 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: > > On Mon, 7 Jan 2013 09:37:05 -0800 > > Mark Knecht 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. --bcaec54c4fca55842404d2bcad29 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


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 <markknech= t@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Now, my point is that change to /dev/srX was the root cause i= s 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 n= eed to
> >> modify how udev looks at the system. Is it a bug? I don't= know. =C2=A0It'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 i= t'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 ha= d a
> > reason, maybe they got lazy. Either way you get to add your own r= ules
> > to get the names YOU want.
> >
> > It really is as simple as that, don't overthink this one.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Alan McKinnon
> > alan.mckinnon@gmail.co= m
> >
> >
>
> Alan,
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0While I don't completely disagree with your POV, let&= #39;s at least
> agree that it is nothing other than your POV. I have a different one,<= br> > but as it's mine it's clearly of little interest or value.
>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0I 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<= br> > 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<= br> > 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<= br> > doing the community a small service by getting a little bit of
> technically positive info out there. I guess not in this case.
>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0Sorry 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.

--bcaec54c4fca55842404d2bcad29--