Re: [PATCH] 64-md-raid.rules fixes v2

[Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>]

On Sunday March 15, soltys@ziu.info wrote:
(sorry for taking nearly a month to reply...)

> 1) introduced in commit b822542608326092e177fd1707ca7fb53b2846c4
> 
> md/array_state in case of partition doesn't exists, so all uevents
> for partitions didn't execute any SYMLINK rules

Thanks.  I've applies this (with a slightly more verbose comment) in
the version of the rules file to be released with mdadm-3.0

> 
> 2) add compat rule, so both MD_DEVNAME (mdadm 3.0) and MD_NAME
>    (mdadm 2.9.x) can be used

I probably don't agree with this.
mdadm 2.x created dev files in /dev directly.  So it does not expect
udev to do anything, particularly with names.

mdadm 3.x by contrast doesn't create anything in /dev (if udev seems
to be installed) so the rules file must create everything.

So I think that 'compat' rule is wrong.  I'm happy to listen to more
details arguments though.

http://neil.brown.name/git?p=mdadm;a=commitdiff;hú5090285af9401f950aa5c1a3a82708c69c4906

Thanks,
NeilBrown