On Feb 13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I had this problem on 2/3 machines I upgraded today. The upgrade that > worked was from 0.076-6; the other two were from 0.081-1. I donno if > thats relevant. I doubt it, both versions use s-d-d --name.
> I wonder if perhaps the udev daemon was killed by something other than > s-s-d, The error message you reported had the s-s-d prefix. > or by some earlier part of s-s-d? I do not know what this means. -- ciao, Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
