Other Why is /dev/cd0 clueless?

Chris_H

Chris_H

I've been tracking RELENG for quite a few years, and I notice two things have changed from RELENG_8 --> RELENG_9: /cdrom is no longer created, and /dev/cd0 seems pointless. In the past /cdrom was always defined in fstab(5) thusly:
Code: 
/dev/cd0   /cdrom   cd9660   ro,noauto   0   0
or
Code: 
/dev/cd0   /cdrom   cd9660   ro,noauto,noatime   0   0
and things just worked (mostly). Slip a CD, or DVD into the drive, and mount /cdrom, and mount(8) exec'd mount_cd9660(8) without complaint. Life was relatively simple. But with RELENG_9, /cdrom is gone. Re-creating it, and re-creating the entry in fstab(5), don't provide the (previous) anticipated functionality; mount /cdrom, results in
Code: 
mount: /dev/cd0: Invalid argument
errm.. huh? But mount -t cd9660 /dev/cd0 /cdrom, and mount_cd9660 /dev/cd0 /cdrom do work, as anticipated. Have I overlooked something in UPDATING. Does anyone know what's changed?

NOTE: for the record; I do have options CD9660 in all my kernels (it's also defined in GENERIC).

Thank you for all your time, and consideration.

--Chris
 
wblock@ said:
noatime seems like it would be an invalid argument for a read-only filesystem.
Click to expand...
Sure. But even w/o without the noatime declaration the results are the same. It's all quite puzzling. Maybe I need to catch[]up on hald(8), or dbus? I'm not strictly using devd(8). At least I didn't set it up.

Thanks for the reply, wblock@!

--Chris
 
wblock@ said:
The entry in fstab(5) works with mount /cdrom here on 10-STABLE.
Click to expand...
Hmm, odd. This is an issue for me on both RELENG_9, and 11-CURRENT.
Maybe I'll just rm -r /dev/cd0, and bounce the box, and see if when it's remade the device. It will work.
wblock@ said:
This is all base system stuff, so hal and dbus are not involved.
Click to expand...
That was my understanding. But I was just groping for possible solutions.

Thanks, wblock@!

--Chris
 
Deleting /dev/cd0 will not do you any good because it is a virtual entry in the device file system devfs. It is created on each driver attach to a hardware device it is appointed to for handling. But I would not loose hald out of sight. That thing does poll the drive and might simply be blocking the driver. Anyway, you should be much better off with that one not running.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top