From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Harald Hoyer Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 12:21:50 +0000 Subject: Re: udevsend fallback Message-Id: <40A0C55E.90006@redhat.com> List-Id: References: <20040511111641.GB12034@vrfy.org> In-Reply-To: <20040511111641.GB12034@vrfy.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org Kay Sievers wrote: > Hi, > the execution of udev depends on the proper fuction of udevd, the > serializing daemon. If we can't connect to udevd within a 20 second we > give up and the request to create a node is lost. Hope this never happens, > but a broken udevd may prevent udev from working. >=20 > What do you think? Should we call the udev binary directly from udevsend > instead of discarding the event? This way we would create the node, regar= dless > of the state of udevd. It would be 20 seconds later and maybe not in the = right > sequence order - but the node will propably be there. >=20 > Does it sound sane? What do you think? >=20 > thanks, > Kay Directly is better than nothing... my 2=A2, Harald ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by Sleepycat Software Learn developer strategies Cisco, Motorola, Ericsson & Lucent use to=20 deliver higher performing products faster, at low TCO. http://www.sleepycat.com/telcomwpreg.php?From______________________________= _________________ Linux-hotplug-devel mailing list http://linux-hotplug.sourceforge.net Linux-hotplug-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-hotplug-devel