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

[Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org>]

On Sat, 2005-02-26 at 02:06 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>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.

Yes, I'm all for going that way. We may use Greg's tiny multiplexer to
emulate the current behavior and systems who don't depend on it can just
remove the rule for it and on event time no directory needs to be
examined.

If we ever get too much rule files, we may even write the parsed rules
out as a binary array and just mmap() it with any later udev event
process, so we would have the best possible performance.

Kay



-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_ide95&alloc_id\x14396&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