From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by mail.saout.de (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:37:08 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4AE05FE8.7090908@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:36:40 +0200 From: Peter Rajnoha MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4ADD7639.6060904@archlinux.org> <4ADD7B1F.9060704@redhat.com> <4ADD9876.8000006@redhat.com> <4ADDA96F.2080109@archlinux.org> In-Reply-To: <4ADDA96F.2080109@archlinux.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [dm-crypt] 1.1.0rc2: device-mapper: remove ioctl failed: Device or resource busy List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Thomas_B=E4chler?= Cc: dm-crypt@saout.de, Milan Broz On 10/20/2009 02:13 PM, Thomas B=E4chler wrote: >> I know, the solution with OPTIONS+=3D"last_rule" would be much easier, >> since it >> ignores any rules further, but at least this way we can spot all the >> places where >> dm devices are touched by the rules and we can send a notice to those >> maintainers. >> Otherwise this would be hidden forever. >=20 > Good point - but I still think that telling udev to leave the device > alone completely feels like the right thing to do. >=20 ..ok, finally we kept the "last_rule" in the lvm/dm upstream. This is the safe way. Maybe later we can think of a solution where we will rely on the others so they will check the variables we set for them (if that's possible at all). But it would be too dangerous now, I have to admit. You can check the rules we have in the upstream - if you have any comments or hints, just feel free to write me back... Peter