Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: karl@××××××××.se
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: *dev-less gentoo
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 21:06:39
Message-Id: 20160119210552.3166981053E0@turkos.aspodata.se
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: *dev-less gentoo by Alan McKinnon
1 Alec McKinnon:
2 > On 19/01/2016 18:51, karl@××××××××.se wrote:
3 ...
4 > > I have had no pain useing an old plain /dev. What's the pain ?
5 > take a machine running a desktop. Plug in a usb printer. Where's your node?
6
7 To find that out I'd investigate /sys/bus/usb, either directly or via
8 usb-devices or some other program. I guess "some other program" is
9 probably udev or similar for you, it might not be for me.
10
11 If it is a usb disk, I just look at the output of sg_map -x -i, and then
12 decide what to do.
13
14 > That's the whole point of a dynamic dev manager, it responds to devices
15 > changes that occur on normal modern machines and does TheRightThing(tm)
16 > - currently defined as whatever the dev-manager config tells it to do.
17
18 Ok, I don't have any usb printer, all my printers are network connected
19 and do handle postscript and lpd.
20
21 And my "dev-manager" tells the system to do nothing till the owner of
22 the system tells it to do so, which is the right thing for me.
23 The right thing might be something else for you.
24
25 > I'm having a hard time thinking what kind of machine you have in this
26 > day and age that can do mail and also does not need a dynamic device
27 > maanger. Please enlighten us, or are you perhaps using MAKEDEV?
28
29 Please be aware of that I'm not impling anything about anyone else than
30 me och don't ridicule me.
31
32 To do mail, all you have to have is a network connection, a mail
33 program and a mail server to relay through. All of that has been done
34 for ages without any program like udev. So I don't understand why you
35 have any problem understanding how that is done, or why you choose such
36 an example.
37
38 And I don't use MAKEDEV, the dev-nodes are already there, there is no
39 need to create them again. What's the fuss ?
40
41 ...
42 > Sounds like you made one mistake once and that has now become the world
43 > for you. Almost no-one else here has reported dynamic dev managers make
44 > "everything just stop working". What you will hear is lots of whinging
45 > about udev - actually it's whinging about udev's maintainers cleverly
46 > disguised as whinging about the software - but as a class of software
47 > they all get the job done and do it well.
48
49 No, I did not do the mistake, the upgrade program or the udev
50 installer did. And since udev (or something related to it) mounts
51 something on /dev, which makes it in practice inpossible to unmount.
52 So if udev do not fill up the new fs correctly, the system is hosed,
53 yea, unless I value running mknod by hand and from memory.
54 That very problem I had is probably fixed by now. But I don't see the
55 need to get exposed to it again. If udev had used e.g. /udev and
56 populated that dir seperately from /dev, I would not have that special
57 problem. udev seems to be hardcoded to /dev, but other similar program
58 are more malleable in this regard, and if need arises I wouldn't
59 hesitate to test them.
60
61 Regards,
62 /Karl Hammar
63
64 -----------------------------------------------------------------------
65 Aspö Data
66 Lilla Aspö 148
67 S-742 94 Östhammar
68 Sweden
69 +46 173 140 57

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: *dev-less gentoo waltdnes@××××××××.org