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

[Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 5:53 PM, William Kenworthy <billk@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> On 07/01/13 09:44, Mark Knecht wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <SNIP>
>>>
>>> I'm not sure that is a bug.  As I posted earlier, this was changed a
>>> good while back.  There was a reason for it but I can't recall what it
>>> was.  The new devices for CD/DVDs is /dev/sr*.  I don't have, and have
>>> not had, /dev/cdrom or dvd on this rig for a good while and it works.  I
>>> think this happened about the same time as the hard drive devices were
>>> changed from hd* to sd* even for old IDE drives.  Since it was changed
>>> on purpose, I don't believe this is a bug.
>>>
>>> Dale
>>
>>
>> Might be true but how about digging up some references that this was
>> done on purpose. It makes little sense to me that if someone did this
>> on purpose, breaking lots of old scripts, leaving broken udev rules
>> laying about and just assuming everyone would figure it out without so
>> much and a news item then I'd say it was done pretty badly.
>>
>> Again, if it truly was 'on purpose' as you say then that's OK, but
>> let's not create too much false history here. In my mind it's just as
>> reasonable that it's just a mistake or someone that was overlooked,
>> but I'm totally open to you showing us what we all missed.
>>
> Seems like the cabal has been busy again ... its not a bug but a feature!
>
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/hotplug/udev.git;a=commit;h=19b66dc57cce27175ff421c4c3a37e4a491b9c01
>
> Also some hits on gentoo forums etc which imply that when actually
> merged, the rules file was not included..
>
> This did happen awhile back and I just moved to /dev/sr0 and got on with
> life so didnt go into it in too much detail.
>
> BillK
>
>
>

Bill,
   From the link you provided:

"From now on, udev will only create /dev/cdrom for the first optical
drive, and if the drive is capable /dev/dvd. No other devices will
get any compatibility symlinks or enumerated device names like cdrom1,
cdrom2, and so on. The /dev/cdrom and /dev/dvd links have by default
a negative link priority, which will cause them to be overwritten by
any other device which clains the same names with already existing
udev rules."

According to the above info Kay didn't single-handedly eliminate
/dev/cdrom or /dev/dvd.

I understand lots of folks are quite unhappy with udev and some
of the decisions Kay has been taking. (I do real LKML!) :-)

Anyway, I'm not saying it isn't on purpose.

Cheers,
Mark