> On Dec 2, 2013, at 3:31 PM, "Dmytriyenko, Denys" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 09:15:45PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 10:27:06PM +0000, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Tom Rini [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Rini, Tom
>>>> Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 2:00 PM
>>>> To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
>>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>>> Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 5/6] mount-sdcard: Update to use new udev
>>>> entry
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 09:45:20AM -0600, Franklin S. Cooper Jr wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> * Patch 1c1b695310309ec3526f1b6b415c5e1b74a567e1 added a udev
>>>> entry to
>>>>> automatically mount sd card partition.
>>>>> * For some reason that udev entry isn't automatically ran.
>>>>> * As a workaround manually trigger udev to run twice (not sure why thats
>>>> needed)
>>>>> for the udev rule to run correctly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Franklin S. Cooper Jr <[email protected]>
>>>>
>>>> This issn't right. Have you added debugging steps to the mount.sh script?
>>>> We're saying, with this change "lets trigger all block devices 3 times",
>>>> and on the
>>>> 3rd attempt we finally do mount things. I've seen some partitions NOT be
>>>> auto-
>>>> mounted due to being dirty and needing an fsck prior to mounting them. If
>>>> we
>>>> need to do this type of change at the end as a "we can't figure out the
>>>> root
>>>> cause, but we need to release", OK.
>>>> But I don't think we're there yet. Thanks!
>
>>> [Franklin] Just to give an update it looks like fsck is required to be ran
>>> to fix this problem however it wouldn't be safe to run fsck and let it
>>> auto fix the problem since that could cause potential issues. So if fsck
>>> is really the proper solution then I'm not sure that would work for
>>> something that needs to automatically work at bootup.
>>
>> Well, dirty cards shouldn't be auto-mounted. Or there's some option to
>> mount we should be passing to say "no, it's OK".
>
> So, what is the agreement here? I don't think forcing fsck for mounting a
> card
> is a good idea. I agree with Tom that if the card is dirty (could be
> corrupted),
> then user intervention is required anyway.
>
> I'm planning on skipping these 2 patches, if nobody objects.
We need to figure this out but feel free to skip the patches.
>
> --
> Denys
_______________________________________________
meta-arago mailing list
[email protected]
http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago
