From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 07:55:48 +0000 Subject: Re: new release of udev? Message-Id: <20050519075548.GA26138@kroah.com> List-Id: References: <20050519065848.GA25640@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: <20050519065848.GA25640@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 09:30:27AM +0200, Kay Sievers wrote: > On Wed, 2005-05-18 at 23:58 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > Ok, now that the next kernel release is going to require people to > > update udev, I want to make a new release. I know the two of you have > > been talking a lot about if the 057 release was good enough to package > > up due to the dev.d change. > > > > Did you come to any conclusions? > > It wasn't continued. I'm on the way starting a big next roud of work on > the udev package. Basically moving a lot of the SUSE version upstream. > The SUSE package has a lot of nice features, like netlink instead of > udevsend and initramfs-event-replay... All that can be compile options > in the upstream package. That's great, but I think I need to get a release out before then, due to the kernel issue I created :) > There is a small hole in the rules concept: > If a custom rule want's to set custom permissions, but the system has a > SUBSYSTEM-only rule to set default permissions, the user supplied perms > are overridden. To prevent that, the rule can use "last_rule", but that > prevents later RUN-rules to be executed. > > That behavior was that way since the beginning, not a change in 057. > Only the use of the RUN key is a bit difficult then. To solve that, I > will implement deferred(question mark) assignment, like in Makefiles for > the default system-supplied rules to use: > SUBSYSTEM="block", GROUP?="disk" > > will only set the permissions if no other rule has already set the > group. This should solve that small issue. Ah, ok, thanks for the explaination. And thanks for the proposed fix. > > For now, we are still processing the dev.d tree by default, right? > > Yes, nothing has changed in that area. Good, it shouldn't be that tough of an upgrade then. thanks, greg k-h ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by Oracle Space Sweepstakes Want to be the first software developer in space? Enter now for the Oracle Space Sweepstakes! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt12&alloc_id344&op=click _______________________________________________ Linux-hotplug-devel mailing list http://linux-hotplug.sourceforge.net Linux-hotplug-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-hotplug-devel