Aaron Griffin schrieb:
Some followups here. tpowa went ahead and handled a few of the changes I was discussing here, but there are a few more before I push this to testing.
I hope I can make the changes to load-modules.sh soon to make blacklisting work in a reasonable way. See http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/10972#comment32200
Firstly: On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Damjan Georgievski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:And, 51-arch.rules is being installed in /etc/udev/rules.d. Shouldn't it go in the new location?Probably not, the idea about rules in /lib/udev/ is that those are the stock rules as shipped with udev. And any distro or system rules would go to /etc/udev/rules.d/ (anything that's not stock). There's some info here: http://lwn.net/Articles/293689/So I've moved 81-arch.rules back to /etc. There should be no need to recompile applications, as those rules should still go to /etc
That depends on how you define "stock rules". Usually, the files in /etc/ are there for the user to be changed. However, our rules are not there to be changed, that's what the user creates his own rule files for.
Now I don't see that we should make any difference between rules shipped upstream by udev and rules added by Arch. My opinion here is that /lib is for the distribution and the package manager and /etc is for the user. Therefore, Arch's rules should be in the same place as udev's upstream rules.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
