25.06.2012 16:00, Dmitrijs Ledkovs пишет:
On 25/06/12 13:55, Michael Tokarev wrote:
[]
It is enough to copy first of /etc/udev, /lib/udev file, to ONE
place (either to /lib/udev or /etc/udev). No need to copy both,
and generally, no need to use two (/etc/udev and /lib/udev) dirs
in initramfs.
No, it is not.
The file in /etc with the same name takes precedence over /lib.
sure.
But if the admin screwed it up and manages to render his system
unbootable due to borked udev rule in the /etc, we should offer the
system file in the initramfs.
If the admin screwed the file in /etc/udev/, having /lib/udev version
in initramfs wont help much, -- the only case where it might help is
when running shell in the initramfs and copying the /lib one to /etc
(or removing /etc one), but in this case it is as easy to just edit
the screwed up file manually. IMHO.
But you indeed have some good point here. Not much useful but potentially,
or remotely, useful still ;)
Most other packages copy both etc and lib.
In the most common scenario, they will not modify mdadm.rules.
There is no clear policy whether we should copy only one into /etc or
both into both locations.
Yes, there's no clear common policy here.
So okay, you convinced me, let's do it this way ;)
Thanks,
/mjt
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
