On Sat, 27 Jun 2009, Joe Steele wrote:
On 6/26/2009, Dag Wieers wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009, Joe Steele wrote:
The patch file should look like this:
--- util/udev.rules2005-11-03 19:38:05.0 +0100
+++ util/udev.rules2005-11-03 19:38:13.0 +0100
@@ -1 +1 @@
-KERNEL==fuse, MODE=0666
+KERNEL=fuse, NAME=%k, MODE=0660,OWNER=root,GROUP=fuse
Not quite right. If you do 'man udev' you can find out what the difference
is between '=' and '=='.
== Compare for equality.
= Asign a value to a key. Keys that represent a list, are
reset and only this single value is assigned.
If you look at other files in /etc/udev/rules.d/, you can see that this is
on purposes. The parts with '==' are filters, and when they match, the
parts with '=' are being assigned.
Your point is well taken. Upon further checking, the syntax for udev rules
changed with udev version 055. Here's a link to the release notes for that
version (a long link that may get wrapped):
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/hotplug/udev.git;a=blob;f=RELEASE-NOTES;h=0bddab41897fc9c158beb1b22fe9c8feb545;hb=2861655484df31fdeb2a8d04b5abf8fe9bc8a2f8
So, for a CentOS-5 system with udev version 095, my fix is inappropriate,
just as you noted.
However, for a CentOS-4 system with udev version 039, the fix is necessary.
Without it, group ownership of /dev/fuse does not get set to group fuse as
intended by the patch.
Right, that makes a lot of sense. I should not jump to conclusions like
that or assume that things weren't different with older distributions. It
could have helped if you specified that though, but that's still no excuse
:-/
I guess to fix it correctly, the patch contents should depend on the target
distribution (and its version of udev) for which the RPM is being built.
I will fix it, are you interested to test it out ?
--
-- dag wieers, d...@wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ --
[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]
___
suggest mailing list
suggest@lists.rpmforge.net
http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/suggest
