On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 8:53 AM, Chris Lalancette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Right, both points make sense. I think the following patch should address > it; I > only conditionally set the UDEVADM variable if I find it. So, for machines > without it, the meat of virStorageBackendWaitForDevices is compiled out. > In > places where I've found it on the build machine, I then do "access" for > executable at runtime, and only if that succeeds do I run it. Does that > seem > correct? In addition, based on the comment from Guido, I changed it over > to use > "udevadm settle" instead of "udevsettle". > Please make it try both: RHEL5 has an ancient udev095 and doesn't have udevadm but it does have udevsettle
-- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
