Re: udev applied to SDHC card. Two systems compared.
From: "Alexander V. Makartsev" <avbetev@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2021 03:49:14 +0500
> My point was, you could've used better or more identifiers to
> distinguish between devices, so there is no other device could ever
> interfere. For example, what will happen if you plug in another drive
> with the same size?
Acknowledged. In the desktop system, this works and avoids the
possibility of another /dev/sd?1 of identical size.
KERNEL=="sd?1", ENV{ID_SERIAL_SHORT}=="0201202010201000", SYMLINK+="GRNSD", \
OWNER="peter", GROUP="peter"
The same fails in the laptop system as the ATTR{size} variant failed.
> ... by naming your custom rule "99-*.rules" you will make it to be
> processed last, effectively bypassing possible race condition between the rules.
Each of these systems has only one local.rules file. Nevertheless
I renamed to 99-local.rules.
> Systems could have different card-readers based on different controllers ...
For test purposes I use one USB-SD adapter moved between the two systrems.
> ... different usb hub devices.
The Sharp Mebius laptop also has a PC card (PCMCIA) SD adapter where
the SD also fails to work. But it works in the SD socket in a XO-1.5.
All evidence is consistent with a failure limited to the Sharp laptop.
I should have mentioned earlier that in a previous Debian release the
same SD card worked in the Sharp laptop just as in the desktop system.
(Don't remember which release.) A bug report may be justified.
> I'm sorry, if I wasn't clear enough in previous letter. English is
> an every day struggle for me.
Assuming English is your 2nd or 3rd or 4th language, your English is
excellent. A person learning English after their first language tends
to learn the grammar systematically. Whereas I learned grammar mostly
by osmosis. =8~|
Thanks, ... P.
--
mobile: +1 778 951 5147
VoIP: +1 604 670 0140
48.7693 N 123.3053 W
Reply to: