On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 17:45:33 +0200 Alan McKinnon <alan.mckin...@gmail.com> wrote:
[about udev and CONFIG_DEVTMPFS=y] > A news item about this is coming down the wire very soon now (aka > within hours judging by the thread on -dev). It's there now. Among other things, it mentions checking the /dev entry in fstab, if there is one. I don't have one, but I'm curious. Is it the udev-mount service in my default runlevel that makes it unnecessary to have /dev in fstab? Also, what would be the reasons for adding a /dev entry? > Unfortunately, it's too late for you now but at least many other users > will see the message before they emerge world and save them some pain Yeah. I use elogv to look at anything with warnings or errors after an emerge, and I can't explain how I overlooked the bright red notice this time. Normally, I follow this group and know what has come up for people running ~arch (or if I don't *know*, I at least remember there's to keep my eyes open for). But I've given up on following udev threads here, which tend to get pretty noisy. Of course there's no substitute for paying attention, but it's nice to get a news item, even nicer if it comes before things hit stable.
