Fedora 16 beta vice Knoppix
jspaleta at gmail.com
Wed Oct 5 15:41:42 UTC 2011
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 6:40 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam at redhat.com> wrote:
> So essentially all that's going on here is 'wait for udev to be done',
> which is a fairly sensible prerequisite for all manner of other bits of
> The reasons why udev takes a while to be 'done' are more interesting and
> Lennart went into some of them.
Right, and as I've said..in the context of the comparison with Knoppix
specifically I found evidence that udev settle use to be a long boot
up blocker in previous Knoppix releases. I wouldn't be surprised at
all if Knoppix init had been changed in the newest release that JB
tried to no longer call the settle function (or call it with a very
short timeout) But I'm not going to be downloading Knoppix and
dissecting its init to prove that to myself. Its obvious from my
testing that settle is one of the big blockers, a blocker multiple
live distributions have hit in the last year actually.
What I'm trying to do is wrap my head around is even if we defaulted
to a no LVM install scenario how could we reconstitute the logic
associated with fedora-local-fs so the lvm based need for udev settle
was optional. It's seems like digging ourselves out of the hole while
still supporting lvm as a non-default option could be complicated.
More information about the devel