Re: [RFC][PATCH] udev: add udev-utils to RDEPENDS

["David Nyström" <david.c.nystrom@gmail.com>]

On mån  3 feb 2014 14:43:53, Phil Blundell wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-02-03 at 13:58 +0100, David Nyström wrote:
>> An intended fix for below error message with core-image-lsb,
>> Sending this as an RFC since I dont really know what constitutes
>> a RRECOMMENDS vs. RDEPENDS.
>> Is this clearly defined somewhere ?
>> Below should be an RDEPENDS, no ?
>>
>> INIT: version 2.88 booting
>> Starting udev
>> udevd[59]: starting version 182
>> /etc/rcS.d/S04udev: line 108: udevadm: command not found
>> /etc/rcS.d/S04udev: line 113: udevadm: command not found
>> /etc/rcS.d/S04udev: line 114: udevadm: command not found
>
> That depends (ha ha) on what the udevadm call in question is actually
> doing.  If udev is so badly broken without it as to be unusable then
> yes, it should be an RDEPENDS.  If udev will still work without then
> RRECOMMENDS is appropriate and the initscript should be tweaked to deal
> with it.
>
> p.
>
>


SNIP
--
    udevadm control --env=STARTUP=1
    if [ "$not_first_boot" != "" ];then
            udevadm trigger --action=add --subsystem-nomatch=tty 
--subsystem-nomatch=mem --subsystem-nomatch=vc 
--subsystem-nomatch=vtconsole --subsystem-nomatch=misc 
--subsystem-nomatch=dcon --subsystem-nomatch=pci_bus  
--subsystem-nomatch=graphics        --subsystem-nomatch=backlight 
--subsystem-nomatch=video4linux  --subsystem-nomatch=platform
            (udevadm settle --timeout=10; udevadm control 
--env=STARTUP=)&
    else
            udevadm trigger --action=add
            udevadm settle
    fi
--
SNIP

Does this classify as essential ?

If essential, we either need to move udev-utils to RDEPENDS.
If not essential, fix the script to detect if udevadm is available.

Br,
David