[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: trixie: cdrecord can no longer write to CD



On 24/11/2025 15:20, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
Max Nikulin wrote:
I am lost which way /dev/scd<n> were created in the past.

Digging in my dim memories ...
It happened after Linux gave up the large unconditional collection of
device files in favor of files which show up only if they have a drive
attached.
I first experienced that novel behavior with a USB attached CD drive.
It may be that HAL, kindof a predecessor of udev, was already at work.
(It was an infamous groper of CD drives in the middle of burn runs
which resulted in wasted CD-R media.)

TLS certificate of cgit.freedesktop.org (where HAL was hosted) has expired. I have a systemd clone and it contains udev history, so I have tried it first.

Creation of scd symlinks was removed in (earliest tag "174"):

d132be4d58 2011-08-12 14:05:19 +0200 Kay Sievers: rules: remove legacy rules for cdrom and usb printer

Earliest usage in udev rules I noticed in (earliest tag "031"):

0a8dd7f37c 2004-09-10 21:04:13 -0700 david@fubar.dk: [PATCH] compatibility symlinks for udev

+KERNEL="scd*", NAME="%k", SYMLINK="cdrom%e"

In some cases "sr<n>" were symlinks:

SUBSYSTEMS=="scsi", KERNEL=="sr[0-9]*",                NAME="scd%n", SYMLINK+="sr%n"

I am puzzled by [a-z] for "sr" and "scd" (wodim uses numbers).

+# cdrom symlinks and other good cdrom naming
+BUS="ide",  KERNEL="hd[a-z]",  PROGRAM="/etc/udev/scripts/cdsymlinks.sh %k", SYMLINK="%c{1} %c{2} %c{3} %c{4} %c{5} %c{6}"
+BUS="scsi", KERNEL="sr[a-z]",  PROGRAM="/etc/udev/scripts/cdsymlinks.sh %k", SYMLINK="%c{1} %c{2} %c{3} %c{4} %c{5} %c{6}"
+BUS="scsi", KERNEL="scd[a-z]", PROGRAM="/etc/udev/scripts/cdsymlinks.sh %k", SYMLINK="%c{1} %c{2} %c{3} %c{4} %c{5} %c{6}"

These parts of code are rather volatile, I am unsure if it was a part of some release or it was just temporary state of a development branch.

It seems, currently wodim should access only sr<n>, not scd<n> despite what kernel docs say. I would not be surprised if there were periods of scd without sr or vice versa in the past. At least a comment should mention scd.


Reply to: