ports/149134: x11/gnome2 unable to unmount UFS file system

[Kevin Oberman]

> Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2010 12:22:20 -0400
> From: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus at freebsd.org>
> Sender: owner-freebsd-gnome at freebsd.org
> 
> On 8/29/10 5:29 AM, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> > on 29/08/2010 01:18 Joe Marcus Clarke said the following:
> >> On 8/28/10 4:02 PM, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> >>> on 28/08/2010 22:28 Joe Marcus Clarke said the following:
> >>>>
> >>>> Try http://www.marcuscom.com/downloads/patch-hald_hf-storage.c
> >>>
> >>> Just wondering aloud... Would the same strange things (mentioned in the comment
> >>> in the patch) happen with labels for other filesystems like msdos/ cd9660/ ?
> >>> Or it's something specific to UFS?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Yeah, it could happen for other labels, I suppose.  The problem is that
> >> the labels that appear dynamically depending oh whether or not a device
> >> is mounted confuses hal.  If someone mounts /dev/cd0, unmounts it, then
> >> sees /dev/cd9660/FREEBSD appear, that will cause hal to think a new
> >> device was inserted.
> >>
> >> That said, I've only seen this happen with UFS.
> > 
> > 
> > BTW, there seems to be an exclamation mark missing in the following part of the
> > patch (hope you use monospaced font):
> > 
> > +	  ! strcmp(fields[1], "PART")) &&
> > +          ! (strncmp(fields[2], "ufsid/", strlen("ufsid/")) ||
> > Here----------^
> > +	  !  strncmp(fields[2], "ufs/", strlen("ufs/"))))
> > 
> > 
> 
> Ugh, you're right.  When I added "ufs/" to the list, I broke the logic.
>  It should be fixed now.

That explains some of the weirdness I've been seeing.

I'm really embarrassed as I found the error in the patch for 2.28 and
fixed it (somewhat differently as I demorganized the logic and changed an
|| to an &&) and then THOUGHT I had confirmed that the patch to 2.30
included my fix. Don't know how I missed it. :-( And, yes, I did post a
note about the broken logic back on Feb. 23.

"I just actually looked at the patch above and I think the problem is
that the second line needs to end with || and not &&. I just re-built
hal with this and I will give it a shot after lunch."

Looks like I neglected to send a confirmation that it did work, though.
Thanks for catching it, Andriy.

I can confirm that it is working, now. I suspect that the logic error
was really the only problem and that the two lines you added to the
patch are superfluous. I have not seen any indication that they cause
any problems, but I have not done really rigorous testing, either.

Guess Santayana was right. I forgot the past and we just repeated it.
-- 
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
Energy Sciences Network (ESnet)
Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab)
E-mail: oberman at es.net			Phone: +1 510 486-8634
Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4  EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751