Em Monday 13 October 2008 14:52:53 Gilles Espinasse escreveu: > Selon Bruce Dubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Randy McMurchy wrote: > > > Matthew Burgess wrote: > > >> I'd prefer to follow upstream and put the Udev supplied default rules > > >> in /lib/udev/rules.d.
> > > Bruce Dubbs wrote: > > > > I say keep them in /etc. I'm too. > > > Do we flip a coin? :-) :-) > > > > > > Actually, I lean towards /lib/udev and I believe DJ and Dan > > > do as well. Does this sort of make it a non-unanimous decision > > > to go with /lib/udev? > > > > I yield to the majority even though I still don't agree. However, I > > believe a paragraph describing the issue is in order. > > > > -- Bruce > > udev maintainer claim > "Most udev rules are not config files, not supposed to be edited, and > therefore do not belong into /etc." > http://marc.info/?l=linux-hotplug&m=121839763301840&w=2 > > > Gilles Well, than it couldn't be editable by a config file, correct?. At least, the "defaults" for the basic devices must to be resonable, and we all make ours "udev-configs packages" to create a secure and organized /dev because these defaults are somewhat insecure or/and ugly. I always believe that /lib and /usr/lib are place to store modules, libraries, binary data and support programs, not plain configurarion texts. Be it for create defaults or not. It's just my opinion. -- Valter Douglas Lisbôa Jr. Sócio-Diretor Trenix - IT Solutions "Nossas Idéias, suas Soluções!" www.trenix.com.br [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
