LinuxQuestions.org
Latest LQ Deal: Complete CCNA, CCNP & Red Hat Certification Training Bundle
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 04-17-2017, 10:41 PM   #1
gobo7
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Aug 2012
Posts: 28

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
14.1 udev rules with name= no longer allowed?


in 13.37 i have some udev rules that set /dev names for certain usb devices.

Code:
SUBSYSTEMS=="usb", ATTRS{idVendor}=="2341", ATTRS{idProduct}=="0043", ATTRS{serial}=="95530343335351B07271", MODE="0666", NAME="ttyUSB8"
now maybe i was not supposed to do that, but it worked.

under 14.1, when i run udevadm test on the rule it tells me "kernel device nodes cannot be renamed". in the udev manual it says the name of a device node cannot be changed by udev. ok.

but what if the node did not exist prior to execution of the rule?
was i doing it wrong back under 13.37?

thanks.
 
Old 04-17-2017, 11:55 PM   #2
ferrari
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Auckland, NZ
Distribution: openSUSE Leap
Posts: 2,289

Rep: Reputation: 363Reputation: 363Reputation: 363Reputation: 363
You can't rename a device node, but you can create a symlink instead. The rule will only be processed when all the matching attributes from the device are present.
 
Old 04-18-2017, 07:25 AM   #3
gobo7
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Aug 2012
Posts: 28

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: Disabled
my confusion is if there is a difference between rename and create. in 13.37 i was able to create new nodes and symlinks. with 14.1 i can't create or rename, only symlink. it plainly says you can't rename a node, but there is no mention of not being allowed to create a new node.
 
Old 04-18-2017, 11:10 AM   #4
gobo7
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Aug 2012
Posts: 28

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: Disabled
i seem to have found the answer to my own question.

from what i can find, back during slackware 13.37 and ubuntu 12.04,
udev could handle the NAME= option. but later on when udev merged
with systemd and incorporated with devtmpfs, this "feature" was
removed.

according to kay sievers, an application should either enumerate on
its own based on properties found or make use of symlinks.

i wish i understood the reasoning behind this decision, but i guess
it is what it is.
 
Old 04-18-2017, 05:04 PM   #5
ferrari
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Auckland, NZ
Distribution: openSUSE Leap
Posts: 2,289

Rep: Reputation: 363Reputation: 363Reputation: 363Reputation: 363
Quote:
i wish i understood the reasoning behind this decision, but i guess
it is what it is.
It's been a done deal for several years now, and it did bring rigorous changes like this. This udev wiki page mentions...

Quote:
In April 2012, udev's codebase was merged into the systemd source tree, making systemd 183 the first version to include udev.[6][12][13] In October 2012, Linus Torvalds criticized Kay Sievers's approach to udev maintenance and bug fixing related to firmware loading, stating:[14]

Yes, doing it in the kernel is "more robust". But don't play games, and stop the lying. It's more robust because we have maintainers that care, and because we know that regressions are not something we can play fast and loose with. If something breaks, and we don't know what the right fix for that breakage is, we revert the thing that broke. So yes, we're clearly better off doing it in the kernel. Not because firmware loading cannot be done in user space. But simply because udev maintenance since Greg gave it up has gone downhill.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 04-19-2017, 06:40 AM   #6
rob.rice
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Distribution: slack what ever
Posts: 1,007

Rep: Reputation: 168Reputation: 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by gobo7 View Post
i seem to have found the answer to my own question.

from what i can find, back during slackware 13.37 and ubuntu 12.04,
udev could handle the NAME= option. but later on when udev merged
with systemd and incorporated with devtmpfs, this "feature" was
removed.

according to kay sievers, an application should either enumerate on
its own based on properties found or make use of symlinks.

i wish i understood the reasoning behind this decision, but i guess
it is what it is.
systemd trying to tack over all linux distros
 
Old 04-21-2017, 09:57 AM   #7
gobo7
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Aug 2012
Posts: 28

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: Disabled
would moving to 14.2 with eudev let me go back to the way i wrote rules in 13.37?
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
RKHunter ASCII text in /dev/.udev/rules.d/root.rules metrx Linux - Security 2 03-07-2014 09:37 AM
[SOLVED] Missing /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules - Chapter 7.2.1. Mordillo98 Linux From Scratch 5 06-11-2012 09:37 PM
Slack 13.1 : /etc/udev/rules.d70-persistent-net.rules Ramurd Slackware 10 02-18-2011 10:56 AM
cat: /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules: No such file or directory rcg1984 Linux From Scratch 2 09-17-2008 08:02 AM
slackware-current, udev 0.96, and custom udev rules not working rignes Slackware 6 08-10-2006 04:43 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:07 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration