From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Aug 17 00:45:18 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 073B937B401 for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 00:45:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout08.sul.t-online.com (mailout08.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE1A443FCB for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 00:45:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Jan.Stocker@t-online.de) Received: from fwd02.aul.t-online.de by mailout08.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 19oIDy-00038e-00; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 09:45:14 +0200 Received: from [10.1.2.252] (GF+q0+ZSoe3mqcWGMZqUtMmMPiFDGC4X-YQmnrnGw3KTbgDcMgt0Uh@[80.134.117.210]) by fwd02.sul.t-online.com with esmtp id 19oIDp-0trOzI0; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 09:45:05 +0200 From: Jan.Stocker@t-online.de (Jan Stocker) To: Olivier Cortes In-Reply-To: <1060504397.777.15.camel@syrenna.deep-ocean.local> References: <1059835661.1198.7.camel@Twoflower.liebende.de> <1060185309.676.1.camel@Twoflower.liebende.de> <1060504397.777.15.camel@syrenna.deep-ocean.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Message-Id: <1061106247.688.5.camel@Twoflower.liebende.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.4 Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 09:44:08 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Seen: false X-ID: GF+q0+ZSoe3mqcWGMZqUtMmMPiFDGC4X-YQmnrnGw3KTbgDcMgt0Uh cc: Mailing-List FreeBSD Current Subject: Re: usbd does not use detach X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 07:45:18 -0000 On Thu, 2003-08-14 at 16:30, Olivier Cortes wrote: > Le Mer 06/08/2003 à 17:55, Jan Stocker a écrit : > > Does nobody has this problem or does noone use this feature? > > the problem i see with detach is the "utility" of the command. > but when detaching, the umount part should be done BEFORE detaching, not > after. i can't find any good use for the detach hook. most of things > should have been done before detaching, and i can't see how to do it > without user interactivity, thus avoiding use of the detach hook. Thats another one.... thats a wrong specification or idea behind it... but here nothing is been called.... > i once included a umount -f in the detach hook. after unplugin' the > device, it resulted in a panic. i don't remember if the umount was > causing it or if it was right after, when accessing the mount point or > repluging the digital recorder. anyway, i learned that umount -f is not > meant to be used often... perhaps not on top of usb. for now. But none of this should cause a panic..... here this works fine if i doing it by hand... Jan -- Jan Stocker