Re: udev rules for new firewire driver stack

[David Moore <dcm@MIT.EDU>]

On Thu, 2008-08-21 at 20:32 +0200, Stefan Richter wrote:
> David Moore wrote:
> > Yes, I think it was me who originally came up with this symlink script.
> > See here:
> > 
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id$0770
> > 
> So, to summarize the need of symlink rules:
> 
>    - We don't need symlinks (aliases) for application support,
>      neither type-oriented aliases, nor persistently named aliases.
> 
>    - Symlinks may be needed to fit the firewire device files into a
>      distro's file permissions scheme though.  (This was actually the
>      intent behind redhat/40-redhat.rules, which wasn't apparent to
>      me when I read the rules files out of context.)
> 
> Ergo, there may be distro-specific symlinks but applications/libraries 
> will not rely on any of those.  (Right?)

Yes, exactly right.

-David