Hi, Rob Bogus wrote: > There is no doubt that a system can run without hald, if you assume that the > administrator is willing to do the same things by hand, and the user > understands how to do all the things which hald typically does.
Personally i am a non-admin and leave my SuSEs quite as they come out of the box. Up to one year ago i had no hald running (SuSE 9 with kernel 2.4) and really did not miss it in any way. The only device automat i want is the USB plug-and-pull recognizer. That worked already on the old SuSEs without hald. I am not curious enough to explore whether hald is involved meanwhile. What i experienced at the first day of 10.2 was CD-RW burn failure due to hald-addon-storage processes. One per drive. They confessed by telling the drive addresses in ps output. Although i do not see it as necessary and do not like its behavior, i acknowledge that hald is there and that a burn program should seek coordination with it. > either using applications which understand hald > or making a simple one time change in the hald config. Any pointer to tutorial documentaion is higly welcome. Topics of interest: - Sysadmin: How to keep hald away from the CD burner ? (I would point from libburn docs to that.) - Burn programmer (C language, console environment): How to negociate with hald in order to either get exclusivity at the drive or to learn that it is already occupied ? What i would deem not acceptable for a burn program: - unstable API form and semantics - fat desktop libraries - non-C languages Have a nice day :) Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to cdwrite-requ...@other.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@other.debian.org