Re: udev is ruining my life
On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 09:21:03AM -0800, Marc Wilson wrote: On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 09:38:35AM -0700, John W. M. Stevens wrote: deleted silly udev rationales I, for one, can see no rationale for udev in it's present form. It works, is not a rationale. But so long as it remains optional, I don't really care, which was exactly my attitude about devfs. And yet, through all of this, no one has yet bothered to read the udev FAQ. Sorry, I've read it several times. Not that I like udev, or care whether or not anyone uses it or not, but the depths of ignorance are appalling. What do you expect with such a minimal and political FAQ? The true story can only be discovered by reading the kernel mailing list. Like watching sausage being made, I wouldn't recommend such to the delicate of stomach. John S. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: udev is ruining my life
John W. M. Stevens wrote: Udev was a response to devfs. Sadly, BOTH systems were poorly thought out. ... Udev was the user space devfs, but unfortunately, it was also designed to cover all of dev, instead of just the sub-set of hot attach/detach devices that make sense for a dynamic device file system. Obviously, better interaction with existing kernel infrastructure is necessary before udev can go live. What wasn't thought out well with udev? (I'm asking whether you mean there's a problem in its core design or whether you just mean that the implications weren't all thought out and handled fully before users were exposed to it.) Daniel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: udev is ruining my life
Daniel B. wrote: What wasn't thought out well with udev? (I'm asking whether you mean there's a problem in its core design or whether you just mean that the implications weren't all thought out and handled fully before users were exposed to it.) I think the people who don't like udev don't like the core design because it works in the opposite way devfs did. With devfs, a program would access a /dev entry and the kernel would load the appropriate kernel module. With udev, you have to load the kernel module (and the device you want to use must be on) before an entry appears in the /dev directory. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: udev is ruining my life
On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 10:25:29AM -0600, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: Mitchell Laks wrote: Last time (TM) I tried udev it was a disaster. I now run 2.6.15-ck3 w/o udev. Everything fine. This subject keeps coming up and as I watch the threads AFAICS udev's rationale is architectural. Better for the world ultimately, but as of yet a headache for the common user, most of the time?, many times?, sometimes? Udev was a response to devfs. Sadly, BOTH systems were poorly thought out. Devfs tried to cover dev, but was a VFS file system that the kernel maintainers thought violated the unspoken, unwritten design rules of the kernel (devfs forced policy into the kernel, or so it was claimed), besides having a few bugs early on. Udev was the user space devfs, but unfortunately, it was also designed to cover all of dev, instead of just the sub-set of hot attach/detach devices that make sense for a dynamic device file system. Obviously, better interaction with existing kernel infrastructure is necessary before udev can go live. John S. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: udev is ruining my life
On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 09:38:35AM -0700, John W. M. Stevens wrote: deleted silly udev rationales And yet, through all of this, no one has yet bothered to read the udev FAQ. Not that I like udev, or care whether or not anyone uses it or not, but the depths of ignorance are appalling. /usr/share/doc/udev/FAQ.gz -- if you have the package installed http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/kernel/hotplug/udev-FAQ (if you don't have the package installed) -- Marc Wilson | Now and then an innocent man is sent to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] | legislature. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: udev is ruining my life
Mitchell Laks wrote: On Friday 10 February 2006 03:42 am, Andreas Janssen wrote: Hello Mitchell Laks ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Now we cant upgrade debian provided kernels beyond 2.6.11 without udev? Why is this a prerequisite?? I can install my own kernel without it. Of course you can. Debian kernels (even 2.6.15) work fine without udev and don't depend on it. What you can't do is: 1. try to make kernels = 2.6.12 work with udev from sarge My main point is that there is something wrong with the default setups given to us with udev. Currently, udev breaks such basic things as installing raids and installing sound. That is crazy. udev replaces a static directory that just works with a dynamic directory. I think that is great, in principle. debian kernel upgrade 2.6.12 forces you to install udev by that I mean - if you blow away udev because of what I said, then debian has udev as a prerequisite for the later kernels and apt-get install linux-image-2.6.12+ from sid (i guess now) forced you to reinstall udev (at least this was true last time I tried it - I now just compile my own kernel in frustration). WHY? In fact you dont need udev - I know this - I am running 2.6.15-3 without udev thank your very much. However, before udev is foisted upon the masses it should come configured so that all the basic static devices we have gotten used to in normal life will work without breaking (I am talking static devices - raid and sound here not hotplugging in exotic devices and expecting constant names - which is something someone can play with if they want it), and then we can use whatever powers we have grown with udev to move on to higher levels - if we choose to... Static devices should have some kind of autoconfig in the udev installation I guess. I should think that this would be a basic requirement. Otherwise udev should be strictly optional and not required at all in normal life. MItchell Last time (TM) I tried udev it was a disaster. I now run 2.6.15-ck3 w/o udev. Everything fine. This subject keeps coming up and as I watch the threads AFAICS udev's rationale is architectural. Better for the world ultimately, but as of yet a headache for the common user, most of the time?, many times?, sometimes? H 2. install hotplug and udev at the same time (unless both is from sarge) 3. keep your hotplug configuration files around after it was removed when your udev package gor upgraded (you are told so during udev installation). Purge the hotplug package. best regards Andreas Janssen -- Andreas Janssen [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP-Key-ID: 0xDC801674 ICQ #17079270 Registered Linux User #267976 http://www.andreas-janssen.de/debian-tipps-sarge.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: udev is ruining my life
On 10 Feb 2006, Mitchell Laks wrote: [snip] Now we cant upgrade debian provided kernels beyond 2.6.11 without udev? Why is this a prerequisite?? I can install my own kernel without it. Devices are a basic thing, usually dealt with at initial system put together, or perhaps when I plug in a usb device, that it is a special annoying headache to spend days to figure these special rules things out. /rant. MItchell I don't understand this. I'm currently using linux-image-2.6.15-1-686 and linux-image-2.6.15-1-k7 on different machines, *without udev*, and there are no problems. The only thing is that I have kept hotplug at the version in Stable because otherwise my wireless card doesn't work. Anthony -- Anthony Campbell - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Microsoft-free zone - Using Linux Gnu-Debian http://www.acampbell.org.uk (blog, book reviews, on-line books and sceptical articles) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: udev is ruining my life
Hello Mitchell Laks ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Now we cant upgrade debian provided kernels beyond 2.6.11 without udev? Why is this a prerequisite?? I can install my own kernel without it. Of course you can. Debian kernels (even 2.6.15) work fine without udev and don't depend on it. What you can't do is: 1. try to make kernels = 2.6.12 work with udev from sarge 2. install hotplug and udev at the same time (unless both is from sarge) 3. keep your hotplug configuration files around after it was removed when your udev package gor upgraded (you are told so during udev installation). Purge the hotplug package. best regards Andreas Janssen -- Andreas Janssen [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP-Key-ID: 0xDC801674 ICQ #17079270 Registered Linux User #267976 http://www.andreas-janssen.de/debian-tipps-sarge.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: udev is ruining my life
On Friday 10 February 2006 03:42 am, Andreas Janssen wrote: Hello Mitchell Laks ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Now we cant upgrade debian provided kernels beyond 2.6.11 without udev? Why is this a prerequisite?? I can install my own kernel without it. Of course you can. Debian kernels (even 2.6.15) work fine without udev and don't depend on it. What you can't do is: 1. try to make kernels = 2.6.12 work with udev from sarge My main point is that there is something wrong with the default setups given to us with udev. Currently, udev breaks such basic things as installing raids and installing sound. That is crazy. udev replaces a static directory that just works with a dynamic directory. I think that is great, in principle. debian kernel upgrade 2.6.12 forces you to install udev by that I mean - if you blow away udev because of what I said, then debian has udev as a prerequisite for the later kernels and apt-get install linux-image-2.6.12+ from sid (i guess now) forced you to reinstall udev (at least this was true last time I tried it - I now just compile my own kernel in frustration). WHY? In fact you dont need udev - I know this - I am running 2.6.15-3 without udev thank your very much. However, before udev is foisted upon the masses it should come configured so that all the basic static devices we have gotten used to in normal life will work without breaking (I am talking static devices - raid and sound here not hotplugging in exotic devices and expecting constant names - which is something someone can play with if they want it), and then we can use whatever powers we have grown with udev to move on to higher levels - if we choose to... Static devices should have some kind of autoconfig in the udev installation I guess. I should think that this would be a basic requirement. Otherwise udev should be strictly optional and not required at all in normal life. MItchell 2. install hotplug and udev at the same time (unless both is from sarge) 3. keep your hotplug configuration files around after it was removed when your udev package gor upgraded (you are told so during udev installation). Purge the hotplug package. best regards Andreas Janssen -- Andreas Janssen [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP-Key-ID: 0xDC801674 ICQ #17079270 Registered Linux User #267976 http://www.andreas-janssen.de/debian-tipps-sarge.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: udev is ruining my life
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Mitchell Laks wrote: My main point is that there is something wrong with the default setups given to us with udev. Currently, udev breaks such basic things as installing raids and installing sound. That is crazy. Not really. The sound devices will be there if you load the modules first (or have them compiled in the kernel). Autoloading the modules will even be done by udev itself in a new enough kernel, new enough udev, in a system with no traces of hotplug left (for PCI/USB/other hotplug-firendly buses). As for raid, MAKEDEV md will create it in /dev/.static/dev if they are not there yet. You can just: mdadm --assemble /dev/.static/dev/md5 /dev/sd9 /dev/sd10 And you will also have a /dev/md5 right away. Static devices should have some kind of autoconfig in the udev installation I guess. That would be a good idea, I suppose. We do need a nice interface to interact with the udev config files for simple things like renaming devices and making them static... -- One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: udev is ruining my life
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 09:19:45 -0500 Mitchell Laks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Friday 10 February 2006 03:42 am, Andreas Janssen wrote: Hello Mitchell Laks ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Now we cant upgrade debian provided kernels beyond 2.6.11 without udev? Why is this a prerequisite?? I can install my own kernel without it. Of course you can. Debian kernels (even 2.6.15) work fine without udev and don't depend on it. What you can't do is: 1. try to make kernels = 2.6.12 work with udev from sarge My main point is that there is something wrong with the default setups given to us with udev. Currently, udev breaks such basic things as installing raids and installing sound. That is crazy. udev replaces a static directory that just works with a dynamic directory. I think that is great, in principle. debian kernel upgrade 2.6.12 forces you to install udev by that I mean - if you blow away udev because of what I said, then debian has udev as a prerequisite for the later kernels and apt-get install linux-image-2.6.12+ from sid (i guess now) forced you to reinstall udev (at least this was true last time I tried it - I now just compile my own kernel in frustration). WHY? In fact you dont need udev - I know this - I am running 2.6.15-3 without udev thank your very much. However, before udev is foisted upon the masses it should come configured so that all the basic static devices we have gotten used to in normal life will work without breaking (I am talking static devices - raid and sound here not hotplugging in exotic devices and expecting constant names - which is something someone can play with if they want it), and then we can use whatever powers we have grown with udev to move on to higher levels - if we choose to... Static devices should have some kind of autoconfig in the udev installation I guess. I should think that this would be a basic requirement. Otherwise udev should be strictly optional and not required at all in normal life. MItchell 2. install hotplug and udev at the same time (unless both is from sarge) 3. keep your hotplug configuration files around after it was removed when your udev package gor upgraded (you are told so during udev installation). Purge the hotplug package. best regards Andreas Janssen -- Andreas Janssen [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP-Key-ID: 0xDC801674 ICQ #17079270 Registered Linux User #267976 http://www.andreas-janssen.de/debian-tipps-sarge.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] IMHO udev is not the one to blame here. I would rather have it that the respective packages (ex. alsa-base) ship with proper configs for udev. As I understand, the whole idea behind introducing udev was to minimize the amount of static device files. There are just too many different *basic* hardware combinations in order to have static devices for all of them. This might still get solved until etch becomes stable. Of course this is all an outsider opinion formed by watching the various threads here on debian-user Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
udev is ruining my life
Hi, I want to provoke some comment. Maybe we can salvage this situation. (Mitchell dons his flame retardent clothes and jumps into swimming pool). I am getting creamed by udev. I just installed sarge on a ibook. I upgraded to sid and upgraded to latest debian kernel 2.6.15. I then tried to get alsa working. I was killed by no device for sound. apt-get remove --purge udev Then I could get some sound. I have about 15 sarge servers, about 10 terabytes of data stored on sarge boxen. I set up new Sarge systems all the time, system on a ide single drive and then create storage raids on separate drives. If I try on a fresh install of sarge, then when I try to run mdadm -Cv /dev/md0 -l1 -n2 /dev/sda1 /dev/sda2 or mdadm -Cv /dev/md0 -l5 -n4 /dev/sda1 /dev/sda2 /dev/sdc1 /dev/sdd1 Guess what I get??? no device /dev/md0 So guess what I do? apt-get remove --purge udev Then I reboot and now I have /dev/md0. This is crazy. Why cant udev just leave us alone in basic situations. We all need sound. We all can use software raid. Why cant udev meet our needs out of the box? Why are we being tortured? I have gamely tried to go along with udev. I have dutifully read the udev documentation. I have read the original articles proposing it. I have read flamewars about it. I have even tried vainly to understand and create rules. But frankly, I feel that there devices I am talking about are so basic and the whole idea of devices should not be so complicated. Now we cant upgrade debian provided kernels beyond 2.6.11 without udev? Why is this a prerequisite?? I can install my own kernel without it. Devices are a basic thing, usually dealt with at initial system put together, or perhaps when I plug in a usb device, that it is a special annoying headache to spend days to figure these special rules things out. /rant. MItchell -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
