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 1R1iJn-0007Lg-PV for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 17:23:16 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 50CC521C128; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 17:23:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ww0-f53.google.com (mail-ww0-f53.google.com [74.125.82.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D385621C10A for ; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 17:22:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wwf25 with SMTP id 25so129645wwf.10 for ; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 10:22:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=2/DgS8Nmr9dJ/Wi7UYybotzfukTI83GaNVSTQVaZ6N0=; b=HnvA/CuYog3vge/wUOsiOVsaM7gkrLjt3gVQZoyGjyPQcDWDoi/iTB76WSeBuvcrJN xNixzTvPL9xkaMfGlKHr/6xiWyjRjIZNMoe7d6fgvqtOFOmaejpcgQGbovPANmb8MpIy sz1U/TCH84w4T+0cARuNNpR5SmWPqDZGlj/fU= 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 10.216.185.4 with SMTP id t4mr993200wem.83.1315502532059; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 10:22:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.39.140 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 10:22:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <12534676.jn0Id4Zse9@pc> References: <201108191109.34984.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> <4842477.AF29R6J79c@pc> <12534676.jn0Id4Zse9@pc> Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 13:22:11 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] /dev/sda* missing at boot From: =?UTF-8?B?Q2FuZWsgUGVsw6FleiBWYWxkw6lz?= To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: b076c07c43fb80665b95593cdbf31a5b On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Michael Schreckenbauer wro= te: > Am Donnerstag, 8. September 2011, 12:45:47 schrieb Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald= =C3=A9s: >> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Michael Schreckenbauer > wrote: >> > Am Donnerstag, 8. September 2011, 16:58:22 schrieb Neil Bothwick: >> >> On Thu, 8 Sep 2011 11:15:40 -0400, Michael Mol wrote: >> >> > Perhaps udev's problem is that it's too complex, as a result of >> >> > having >> >> > too large a problem scope. >> >> >> >> The problem, AIUI, is the udev can run any programs specified in the >> >> rules files, and they may not be available before /usr is mounted. >> > >> > Funny thing is, devfs was removed, because of "unfixable >> > race-conditions" >> > (among other things iirc). What else is this then? >> > An initramfs is not a proper fix for this design flaw, imo. >> >> Then design the correct solution and implement it. If it's technically >> sound, it will prevail. I think it's a rather complicated problem with >> a non trivial solution, but the code is there if you feel like give it >> a try. > > Where did I write, that I am in the position to write such a beast? > I only take the freedom to name this a design flaw in udev. And I only take the freedom to tell you that if you don't like the design, you have the option of improved (or completely replace it) and implement such design. > It needs things from userspace, which are not yet available at the point = it > requests them. An initramsfs is a workaround for this, not a proper fix. Again, it's a complex problem. What do you think is the proper fix? I don't the kernel/Gentoo/udev devs are making this as a workaround. I see it as a policy decision. Maybe I'm wrong, but I really trust the devs. Regards. --=20 Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingenier=C3=ADa de la Computaci=C3=B3n Universidad Nacional Aut=C3=B3noma de M=C3=A9xico