Am 14.02.20 um 12:05 schrieb Andreas Henriksson:
> Hello,
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 02:21:00PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
>> Am 13.02.20 um 14:03 schrieb Trent W. Buck:
> [...]
>>>     78root@DESKTOP-P00TKMM:/# udevadm trigger
>>>     Failed to scan devices: No such file or directory
>> You should only get this error message if /sys is not mounted.
>> I assume your chroot has neither /sys nor /proc mounted.
>> systemd-udevd.service has
>> ConditionPathIsReadWrite=/sys
>> You could try to convince upstream to add a similar check to "udevadm
>> trigger"
> Just wanted to chime in here and say that another way at looking at this
> is to say that calling udevadm (and expecting it to exit with success)
> when udev is not running could possibly be considered the bug.
> (Or in other words, it feels wrong to me to expect udevadm to exit with
> success when it's failing to do the job it was asked to do.)
> From a simple search I can see there are atleast
> some packages which tries to only conditionally run udevadm, eg. via
> 'pidof udevd && udevadm ...' and similar in their maintainer scripts.

The question is, whether such a check should be centralized or not.
systemd-udev-trigger.service also has

We could update all maintainer scripts to wrap that udevadm call into a
if [ -w /sys ]; then ... fi
but it doesn't appear to me as the worst idea to move this check
directly into udevadm and let "udevadm trigger" log a warning/notice and
exit 0 if /sys is not writeable.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to