Re: replace dev.d/ with a rule based program execution

[md@Linux.IT (Marco d'Itri)]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 835 bytes --]

On Feb 26, Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org> wrote:

> >> Remember, it's easier for a package to drop a symlink into the
> >> /etc/dev.d/ directory tree, than it is for it to modify / add a udev
> >> rule.
> >True, but creating a symlink in /etc/udev/rules.d/ is as easy (as long
> >as distribution maintainers have discipline and properly document how
> >new files should be named to have them processed at the right time).
> Sure, it may be easier, but dropping brute-force executed programs to a
> directory _is_ the current problem we need to address, and what all the
> discussion is about, right?
Yes, what I am saying is that it will not be a problem if packages
will need to provide udev rules instead of a dev.d/ script.
And if we keep dev.d/ we are left with the issue of making it scale.

-- 
ciao,
Marco

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]