Matthew Burgess wrote: > Matthew Burgess wrote: >> Bryan Kadzban wrote: >> >>> Or, actually, what happens if you move 70-persistent-net.rules >>> out to /dev/.udev/rules.d/, then do what we have in the >>> udev_retry bootscript? (That is, cat the file out of >>> /dev/.udev/rules.d, and append the result into /etc/udev/rules.d, >>> then rm the version in /dev/.udev/rules.d as a separate >>> operation.) At what point is the message logged, if it's logged >>> in that operation anywhere? >> The message gets logged as soon as I move 70-persistent* to >> /dev/.udev/rules.d.
OK; there's an inotify watch on that directory as well, so that still could be it. >>> If you have console access, you might also try booting with >>> init=/bin/bash (after deleting the generated rules) and running >>> each bootscript individually. This should show which script is >>> causing the log message at least. (Just be sure that if you get >>> to the point of mounting anything read-write, you unmount it >>> before rebooting.) >> It's the S50udev_retry script that triggers it. So it's either the cat, or the rm. ...Probably the cat. > And from a couple of test reboots it looks like the just-released > Udev-151 fixes it. Probably from this in the ChangeLog: > > udevd: inotify - do not parse rules at create but at close Yeah, that would do it. :-) (I don't see a release announcement for -151 yet though. Not that this is relevant, just noting.) Hmm. It seems writing_udev_rules/index.html is now gone as well; doesn't look like our current instructions will work anymore... Ah: "Delete outdated and unmaintained writing_udev_rules" (also from the ChangeLog).
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
