2009/1/22 Andreas Jellinghaus <[email protected]>: > Am Donnerstag 22 Januar 2009 18:57:19 schrieb Alon Bar-Lev: >> On 1/22/09, Andreas Jellinghaus <[email protected]> wrote: >> > using udev was a huge pain for many years, everytime I thought "now it >> > works", a few months later openct didn't work with the new udev. I'm >> > sick of that pain, and since the udev/hotplug/linux-usb folks tell us to >> > use hal, and hal seems to work, I think it is best to take their advice >> > and do that: use hal! >> >> It works correctly for me. >> Maybe I miss something. >> The changes in udev were minor and were not a reason to add more >> dependency. > > some combination of udev rules found in the real world, would cause udev > to call the openct udev script before udev created the device file in > /dev/bus/usb. at the same time distributions stopped using /proc/bus/usb > (because they could put ACLs on /dev/bus/usb and favored it that way). > > sure, even such race conditions could be worked around (fork, sleep 1 sec, > now the device should be there), but it still was annoying. this is only one > example how openct got broken by udev. another time an essential info > passed from kernel to userland for the hotplug events was missing, > and needed to be re-added later. > > anyway, old stories, long closed. using hald is supported upstream and > easier, thus it is the recommend way from my point of view.
I have the exact same (frustrating) experience with udev and pcsc-lite. Plus: - no udev event is generated when the device is removed - it is not possible to use udev to register a callback in a program when an event occurs. You have to write script and use signals. libhal solved all the problems for me. Bye -- Dr. Ludovic Rousseau _______________________________________________ opensc-devel mailing list [email protected] http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
