From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Scott James Remnant Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 13:03:41 +0000 Subject: Re: default udev rules Message-Id: <1218459821.14932.1.camel@quest> MIME-Version: 1 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-wyEAcO6IBXy6QmoJ8FGc" List-Id: References: <1218277281.31266.32.camel@lgn.site> In-Reply-To: <1218277281.31266.32.camel@lgn.site> To: linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org --=-wyEAcO6IBXy6QmoJ8FGc Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 2008-08-10 at 21:47 +0200, Kay Sievers wrote: > On Sun, 2008-08-10 at 19:07 +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > > On Sat, 2008-08-09 at 12:21 +0200, Kay Sievers wrote: > >=20 > > > We like to remind everybody, that all distros should work towards a > > > default udev rules set, instead of maintaining their own home-grown > > > version of default rules. We should all unify as far as possible. > > > Red Hat, SUSE and Gentoo are already using the same rules files, with= a > > > minimal rules set on top, in a distro specific file. We ask the rest = of > > > the universe to join us, and do the same. :) > >=20 > > The conflation of names and permissions in the default rules is a > > problem for us, and why Ubuntu has not adopted them. >=20 > Which names, which perms? Please just list them all, we will try to find > a common solution. >=20 Setting any group names, and thus any group-writable permissions; our rules have these split out into a separate file which is added later. > > I'm also entirely unconvinced about putting rules in /lib instead > > of /etc >=20 > Most udev rules are not config files, not supposed to be edited, and > therefore do not belong into /etc. It's a pretty common, and HAL's model > for fdi files. As we are moving things from HAL to udev, we may have > more things, which are unconvincing until they are used and start to > make sense. :) >=20 I've yet to have it explained to me why udev rules suddenly aren't configuration files. They've been configuration files for years, and we encourage people to edit them. Scott --=20 Scott James Remnant scott@canonical.com --=-wyEAcO6IBXy6QmoJ8FGc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBIoDitSnQiFMl4yK4RAjK9AJ0Qz/4tqvtuyQzWs5o8z3hQScGimQCfSuCX +O4rzz2p4qJKZv5tpNskKfs= =ebTM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-wyEAcO6IBXy6QmoJ8FGc--