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 1S7qd0-0006FQ-MP for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 16:00:42 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2D253E08FB; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 16:00:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from svr-us4.tirtonadi.com (svr-us4.tirtonadi.com [69.65.43.212]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D38BFE06BF for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 15:59:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vx0-f181.google.com ([209.85.220.181]) by svr-us4.tirtonadi.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1S7qbw-003Vzt-3y for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 22:59:36 +0700 Received: by vcge1 with SMTP id e1so2466962vcg.40 for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 08:59:30 -0700 (PDT) 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 10.52.23.74 with SMTP id k10mr2224124vdf.106.1331740770300; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 08:59:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.58.200 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 08:59:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.58.200 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 08:59:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20120312092432.GA2959@acm.acm> <20120313073306.GC23544@waltdnes.org> <20120313130534.GB3457@acm.acm> <20120313190052.GA2430@waltdnes.org> <20120313194727.GB2536@acm.acm> <20120313210737.GD2536@acm.acm> <20120313213330.78c5ebf7@digimed.co.uk> <20120313222019.GE2536@acm.acm> <20120313230358.GF2536@acm.acm> <4F60B72B.1030803@libertytrek.org> Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 22:59:30 +0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Beta test Gentoo with mdev instead of udev; version 5 - failure :-( From: Pandu Poluan To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf307c9b588bf0ee04bb360f72 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - svr-us4.tirtonadi.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.gentoo.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - poluan.info X-Archives-Salt: 750e1ba5-a293-49f8-80b1-1e3c5e997b09 X-Archives-Hash: 09e0814d6042a7b72de62b9df96a5a2b --20cf307c9b588bf0ee04bb360f72 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mar 14, 2012 10:30 PM, "Michael Mol" wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: > > On 2012-03-13 8:07 PM, Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s = wrote: > >> > >> You want it simple? Tha'ts fine, it is possible. It's just that it > >> will not solve the general problem, just a very specific subset of it. > >> Just as mdev is doing; Walt just posted an email explaining that if > >> you use GNOME, KDE, XFCE, or LVM2, mdev is not for you. > > > > > > Very interesting thread guys, and thanks for keeping it relatively civi= l > > despite the passion behind the objections being raised... > > > > I just wanted to point out one thing (and ask a question about it) to anyone > > who argues that servers don't need this - if LVM2 really does eliminate the > > possibility of using mdev for fundamental reasons (as opposed to arbitrary > > decisions), that rules out a *lot* of server installations. > > > > So, that is my question... what is it about LVM2 that *requires* udev? > > > > Or asked another way - > > > > Why is LVM2 incapable od using mdev? Alan has explained that LVM2 actually is able to run under mdev, and he's investigating if there's any LVM2 feature that is not available. So far, there's none, and I'm strongly suspicious that it's a case of missing dev symlinks that prevented LVM2 to work; something later on the "default" runlevel then created the proper dev entries that allow LVM2 to work. If that is the case -- which I strongly suspect -- then one can use mdev's built-in ability to rename/move a device + create a symlink [1] [1] https://svn.mcs.anl.gov/repos/ZeptoOS/trunk/BGP/packages/busybox/src/docs/m= dev.txt > > The presumption is that lvm's dependent binaries would be found > somewhere under a mount point other than / (such as /usr), which gives > you a chicken-and-egg problem if mounting that mount point requires > lvm. > Uh... mounting filesystems is not the purview of {u,m}dev... Rgds, --20cf307c9b588bf0ee04bb360f72 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Mar 14, 2012 10:30 PM, "Michael Mol" <mikemol@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@libertytrek.org> wrote:
> > On 2012-03-13 8:07 PM, Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s <caneko@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> You want it simple? Tha'ts fine, it is possible. It's= just that it
> >> will not solve the general problem, just a very specific subs= et of it.
> >> Just as mdev is doing; Walt just posted an email explaining t= hat if
> >> you use GNOME, KDE, XFCE, or LVM2, mdev is not for you.
> >
> >
> > Very interesting thread guys, and thanks for keeping it relativel= y civil
> > despite the passion behind the objections being raised...
> >
> > I just wanted to point out one thing (and ask a question about it= ) to anyone
> > who argues that servers don't need this - if LVM2 really does= eliminate the
> > possibility of using mdev for fundamental reasons (as opposed to = arbitrary
> > decisions), that rules out a *lot* of server installations.
> >
> > So, that is my question... what is it about LVM2 that *requires* = udev?
> >
> > Or asked another way -
> >
> > Why is LVM2 incapable od using mdev?

Alan has explained that LVM2 actually is able to run under mdev, and he&= #39;s investigating if there's any LVM2 feature that is not available. =

So far, there's none, and I'm strongly suspicious that it's = a case of missing dev symlinks that prevented LVM2 to work; something later= on the "default" runlevel then created the proper dev entries th= at allow LVM2 to work.

If that is the case -- which I strongly suspect -- then one can use mdev= 's built-in ability to rename/move a device + create a symlink [1]

[1] https://svn.mcs.anl.gov/repos/ZeptoOS/trunk/BGP/= packages/busybox/src/docs/mdev.txt

>
> The presumption is that lvm's dependent binaries would be found > somewhere under a mount point other than / (such as /usr), which gives=
> you a chicken-and-egg problem if mounting that mount point requires > lvm.
>

Uh... mounting filesystems is not the purview of {u,m}dev...

Rgds,

--20cf307c9b588bf0ee04bb360f72--