Ubuntu Should Automatically Mount usbfs At Boot Time

[Forest Bond]

In particular, midisport-firmware (and some other packages as well, I assume), depend on usbfs having been mounted. I am not aware of any disadvantage to doing this.

-Forest

[Laurent Bigonville (bigon)]

I think that usbfs in /proc is deprecated. Now ubuntu uses udev and the new location for usbfs is in /dev. See bug #30702

[Andrew Ash (ash211)]

What release are you using, Forest?

[Forest Bond (forest-bond)]

On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 01:29:08AM -0000, Andrew Ash wrote:
> What release are you using, Forest?

edgy

I believe this worked fine in dapper.

I am the maintainer of midisport-firmware, and am happy to make changes to it if
it needs it; upstream is not extraordinarilly friendly, but I don't mind
managing a delta of some kind. Otherwise, I wasn't sure what package this bug
should be filed against.

-Forest

[Daniel T Chen (crimsun)]

Will need to consult Scott regarding whether this feature request is feasible for Feisty. In the meantime, I see no hitches with adding a section to README.Debian informing the user that

none /dev/bus/usb usbfs defaults 0 0

needs to be added to fstab(5).

[Forest Bond (forest-bond)]

On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 08:42:56AM -0000, Daniel T Chen wrote:
> Will need to consult Scott regarding whether this feature request is
> feasible for Feisty. In the meantime, I see no hitches with adding a
> section to README.Debian informing the user that
>
> none /dev/bus/usb usbfs defaults 0 0
>
> needs to be added to fstab(5).

Sounds good, I will attach a debdiff shortly.

-Forest

[Forest Bond (forest-bond)]

On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 08:42:56AM -0000, Daniel T Chen wrote:
> Will need to consult Scott regarding whether this feature request is
> feasible for Feisty.

Should I subscribe Scott to this bug, then?

-Forest

[Scott James Remnant (Canonical) (canonical-scott)]

I am confused by this bug ...

/proc/bus/usb is mounted at boot time, and contains the tree and devices nodes you would expect

[Forest Bond (forest-bond)]

Yes, apologies. This was misunderstood and consequently misreported. Just trying to get some action one way or another. :)

Closing.

thanks,
Forest

[Scott James Remnant (Canonical) (canonical-scott)]

Having looked at the package, your problem is actually that your udev rules are being run in the wrong place.

In order to be able to access the /proc/bus/usb/XXX/YYY device node, you need to run your program as a result of the usb_device subsystem, not the usb subsystem:

For edgy this would look like:

ACTION=="add", SUBSYSTEM=="usb_device", SYSFS{idVendor}=="0763", SYSFS{idProduct}=="1001", RUN+="@fxload@ -s @firmwaredir@/MidiSportLoader.ihx -I @firmwaredir@/MidiSport2x2.ihx"

And for feisty:

ACTION=="add", SUBSYSTEM=="usb_device", ATTR{idVendor}=="0763", ATTR{idProduct}=="1001", RUN+="@fxload@ -s @firmwaredir@/MidiSportLoader.ihx -I @firmwaredir@/MidiSport2x2.ihx"

[Scott James Remnant (Canonical) (canonical-scott)]

sorry, on feisty those should be ATTRS{...}==