On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 21:46:08 +0100
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> So, based on the above, 5 is definitely something to look into I think.
> If that doesn't pan out, then I think option 2 is the next 'least worst'.
>
Or you could set the time with a bootscript. Same with alsactl restore.
run them a
Bryan Kadzban wrote:
>Nathan Coulson wrote:
>> Another thought (one I have not actually tested, forgive me if It's
>> not possible) is trigger only block devices in the first pass, then
>> try devices/subsystems on the 2nd pass?
>
>DJ Lucas wrote:
>> Can we not simply re-trigger all known aff
Andrew Benton wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 21:46:08 +0100
> Matthew Burgess wrote:
>
>> So, based on the above, 5 is definitely something to look into I think.
>> If that doesn't pan out, then I think option 2 is the next 'least worst'.
>>
>
> Or you could set the time with a bootscript. Same
On 16/09/2011 19:09, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Andrew Benton wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 21:46:08 +0100
>> Matthew Burgess wrote:
>>
>>> So, based on the above, 5 is definitely something to look into I think.
>>>If that doesn't pan out, then I think option 2 is the next 'least worst'.
>>>
>>
>> O
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 19:30:58 +0100
Matthew Burgess wrote:
>
> And, as mentioned before, you want to run the alsactl restore stuff on
> device discovery in order to support hot pluggable sound devices. If
> it's done as a one-shot bootscript, manual configuration would be needed
> if you plugg
DJ Lucas wrote:
>
> Bryan Kadzban wrote:
>
>> Although, hmm. Either way here, there's a possible problem, with
>> symlinks for disk devices. If the USB ID file isn't present, then
>> it's possible that the /etc/fstab entry for /usr refers to a
>> symlink that relies on this file. Of course
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Bryan Kadzban wrote:
>
>> Or sysconfig, or wherever similar scripts are put in Bruce's new setup.
>
> Just to mention the layout, what I have is:
>
> /lib/services (network service scripts)
> /lib/lsb(symlink to /lib/services/, init-functions)
>
> /etc/sysconfig
Andrew Benton wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 21:46:08 +0100 Matthew Burgess
> wrote:
>
>> So, based on the above, 5 is definitely something to look into I
>> think. If that doesn't pan out, then I think option 2 is the next
>> 'least worst'.
>
> Or you could set the time with a bootscript.
Only i