On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 11:45:01AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Tuesday 01 May 2012 11:06:42 William Hubbs wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 11:59:02AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > the fact that the script leaves your system in a hard to recover state is > > > what i'm whining about, not that udev requires devtmpfs. > > > > So why did you decide to whine instead of opening a bug? :p > > based on past behavior, i assumed it was operating as indented > > > > we already have examples of the init scripts modifying /etc/issue to > > > notify login entry points that their system needs manual attention to > > > recover. > > > > This part can't happen in the udev init script since / is ro when it is > > run. Doing something in udev-postmount is also eroneous because that > > assumes that the user is booting to the default runlevel which they may > > not be. > > in the past, we would `mount -o remount,rw /`, but that was because we needed > to add missing dirs in /.
Hmm, if I do that I would also have to put it back ro after I modify issue because fsck hasn't run yet... Do we want to mess around with the fs before fsck is run? William
pgpywRiUs1cB0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
