On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 22:55:42 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: > I don't think I agree with Neil in that this is a udev design flaw (as > any "fix" will be worse than the "flaw"). Instead it looks to me like > a classic case of > > "You are free to do anything you want but if you break it you keep the > pieces. If you do something stupid, it's not my problem and you're on > your own." > > I see nothing wrong with udev applying some reasonable constraints such > as clearly documenting at what point in the boot process udev is in a > position to arbitrarily run anything. Earlier than that point, > "anything" does not actually apply.
The reason I think it is a flaw is that udev is capable of doing some very clever stuff with nothing more than a simple device rule, but such clever stuff has no place in early boot. On the other hand, it also does basic stuff, like creating device nodes, that certainly does belong in early boot. The problem is that udev provides no way to distinguish between the early boot essentials and the clever stuff. Only a small subset of its work should be done when it is first started, possibly by tagging those rules, or simply postponing any rules with a RUN command. Or maybe a separate command (or invocation of the same command) that just creates device nodes, and any specified symlinks, much like mdev does, then kick in the full version later. However, as I type this, I can think of all sorts of arguments about what should be run early and what not. I'm beginning to understand why the devs decided "if you want all this clever stuff, you'll just have to make /usr available". -- Neil Bothwick Windows Error:01F Reserved for future mistakes.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
