[arch-dev-public] [signoff] udev-132-1
Hi update to latest version, please signoff for both arches.
greetings tpowa
Tobias Powalowski schrieb:
Hi update to latest version, please signoff for both arches.
greetings tpowa
signoff x86_64
On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Thomas Bächler thomas@archlinux.org wrote:
Tobias Powalowski schrieb:
Hi update to latest version, please signoff for both arches.
greetings tpowa
signoff x86_64
another x86_64 signoff
Ronald
On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Ronald van Haren pressh@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Thomas Bächler thomas@archlinux.org wrote:
Tobias Powalowski schrieb:
Hi update to latest version, please signoff for both arches.
greetings tpowa
signoff x86_64
another x86_64 signoff
Booted fine on i686. However, I thought this was something that should be fixed by udev loading my modules, and it shows up in my dmesg output:
Warning! ehci_hcd should always be loaded before uhci_hcd and ohci_hcd, not after
dmesg has output from usbcore, ohci_hcd, and ehci_hcd in that order, so it does not appear to be loading in the correct order as the message indicates.
-Dan
Booted fine on i686. However, I thought this was something that should be fixed by udev loading my modules, and it shows up in my dmesg output:
Warning! ehci_hcd should always be loaded before uhci_hcd and ohci_hcd, not after
dmesg has output from usbcore, ohci_hcd, and ehci_hcd in that order, so it does not appear to be loading in the correct order as the message indicates.
-Dan
Hi, http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/12009 I talked to brain0 yesterday, it's pretty difficult to do this on udev level, because how you want to trigger if a system has a usb2 controller inside.
Workaround for this warning is to load it in MODULES= in initcpio and rc.conf manually.
greetings tpowa
Dan McGee schrieb:
Booted fine on i686. However, I thought this was something that should be fixed by udev loading my modules, and it shows up in my dmesg output:
Warning! ehci_hcd should always be loaded before uhci_hcd and ohci_hcd, not after
dmesg has output from usbcore, ohci_hcd, and ehci_hcd in that order, so it does not appear to be loading in the correct order as the message indicates.
Udev has no ordering in loading modules, it is all random! Thus, the kernel devs wanting to ensure a particular order on loading modules completely contradicts the general usage of udev. IMO, this is a kernel bug, the order mustn't matter.
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 2:01 AM, Thomas Bächler thomas@archlinux.org wrote:
Dan McGee schrieb:
Booted fine on i686. However, I thought this was something that should be fixed by udev loading my modules, and it shows up in my dmesg output:
Warning! ehci_hcd should always be loaded before uhci_hcd and ohci_hcd, not after
dmesg has output from usbcore, ohci_hcd, and ehci_hcd in that order, so it does not appear to be loading in the correct order as the message indicates.
Udev has no ordering in loading modules, it is all random! Thus, the kernel devs wanting to ensure a particular order on loading modules completely contradicts the general usage of udev. IMO, this is a kernel bug, the order mustn't matter.
You can handle this with modprobe. It's an age-old trick to load another module before the requested module is loaded. Perhaps we should ship a file that has that in there for uhci?
On Wed, 12 Nov 2008, Aaron Griffin wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 2:01 AM, Thomas Bächler thomas@archlinux.org wrote:
Dan McGee schrieb:
Booted fine on i686. However, I thought this was something that should be fixed by udev loading my modules, and it shows up in my dmesg output:
Warning! ehci_hcd should always be loaded before uhci_hcd and ohci_hcd, not after
dmesg has output from usbcore, ohci_hcd, and ehci_hcd in that order, so it does not appear to be loading in the correct order as the message indicates.
Udev has no ordering in loading modules, it is all random! Thus, the kernel devs wanting to ensure a particular order on loading modules completely contradicts the general usage of udev. IMO, this is a kernel bug, the order mustn't matter.
You can handle this with modprobe. It's an age-old trick to load another module before the requested module is loaded. Perhaps we should ship a file that has that in there for uhci?
This has been in testing for a month. I don't know if there are pending bug reports but I haven't noticed any problems. So signoff for both arches.
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Eric Bélanger belanger@astro.umontreal.ca wrote:
This has been in testing for a month. I don't know if there are pending bug reports but I haven't noticed any problems. So signoff for both arches.
Agreed, I second the signoff for i686.
Am Montag 08 Dezember 2008 schrieb Thayer Williams:
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Eric Bélanger
belanger@astro.umontreal.ca wrote:
This has been in testing for a month. I don't know if there are pending bug reports but I haven't noticed any problems. So signoff for both arches.
Agreed, I second the signoff for i686.
I think there was an issue, with symlinks, also a new version is out since quite some time i would like to skip this package movement and just bump it to latest version again. and resignoff.
greetings tpowa
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Tobias Powalowski t.powa@gmx.de wrote:
Am Montag 08 Dezember 2008 schrieb Thayer Williams:
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Eric Bélanger
belanger@astro.umontreal.ca wrote:
This has been in testing for a month. I don't know if there are pending bug reports but I haven't noticed any problems. So signoff for both arches.
Agreed, I second the signoff for i686.
I think there was an issue, with symlinks, also a new version is out since quite some time i would like to skip this package movement and just bump it to latest version again. and resignoff.
That's cool, bump it and I'll have a go. Not sure what it was about the symlinks, but I do make use of them in my automount rules so I'll check that out too.
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 3:39 PM, Thayer Williams thayerw@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Tobias Powalowski t.powa@gmx.de wrote:
Am Montag 08 Dezember 2008 schrieb Thayer Williams:
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Eric Bélanger
belanger@astro.umontreal.ca wrote:
This has been in testing for a month. I don't know if there are pending bug reports but I haven't noticed any problems. So signoff for both arches.
Agreed, I second the signoff for i686.
I think there was an issue, with symlinks, also a new version is out since quite some time i would like to skip this package movement and just bump it to latest version again. and resignoff.
That's cool, bump it and I'll have a go. Not sure what it was about the symlinks, but I do make use of them in my automount rules so I'll check that out too.
It'd cd and dvd related. Something about udev trying to symlink say /dev/dvd0 to /dev/cd/dvd-4:0:0:0 but only /dev/cd/dvd- exists (missing the bus info).
I actually noticed it myself, but it wasn't a huge deal as the device was still there, symlinks were just messed
participants (7)
-
Aaron Griffin
-
Dan McGee
-
Eric Bélanger
-
Ronald van Haren
-
Thayer Williams
-
Thomas Bächler
-
Tobias Powalowski