Am Donnerstag, 8. September 2011, 12:45:47 schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés: > On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Michael Schreckenbauer <grim...@gmx.de> wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, 8. September 2011, 16:58:22 schrieb Neil Bothwick: > >> On Thu, 8 Sep 2011 11:15:40 -0400, Michael Mol wrote: > >> > Perhaps udev's problem is that it's too complex, as a result of > >> > having > >> > too large a problem scope. > >> > >> The problem, AIUI, is the udev can run any programs specified in the > >> rules files, and they may not be available before /usr is mounted. > > > > Funny thing is, devfs was removed, because of "unfixable > > race-conditions" > > (among other things iirc). What else is this then? > > An initramfs is not a proper fix for this design flaw, imo. > > Then design the correct solution and implement it. If it's technically > sound, it will prevail. I think it's a rather complicated problem with > a non trivial solution, but the code is there if you feel like give it > a try.
Where did I write, that I am in the position to write such a beast? I only take the freedom to name this a design flaw in udev. It needs things from userspace, which are not yet available at the point it requests them. An initramsfs is a workaround for this, not a proper fix. > Regards. Regards, Michael
