On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> 2011/5/29 Vytautas Stankevičius :
>> I seem to remember that the point of rc.conf was to configure system in one
>> place. Looks like the politics are changing.
>
> rc.conf is the one place for all Arch-specific settings. As you know
> /etc i
2011/5/29 Vytautas Stankevičius :
> I seem to remember that the point of rc.conf was to configure system in one
> place. Looks like the politics are changing.
rc.conf is the one place for all Arch-specific settings. As you know
/etc is full of config files owned by different packages, rc.conf is
f
On Sunday 29 of May 2011 13:56:15 Tom Gundersen wrote:
> On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Auguste Pop wrote:
> > On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> >> I have not found any uses of the MODULES array like you describe (if
> >> they exist they should be considered bugs though,
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Meyithi wrote:
> If that happened then you used the Archboot install media with it's hwdetect
> consistent device ordering option. Archboot isn't official install media
> and I suspect that feature will have to be reworked because of the udev
> changes anyway.
Th
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Robert Howard wrote:
> I recently did a fresh install and noticed a ton of modules prefixed with !
> in rc.conf by default. Not at the box currently but it was 5-7 modules
> listed. This will have to be changed.
This is not in the initscripts package. Don't know
On 29 May 2011 15:53, Robert Howard wrote:
> I recently did a fresh install and noticed a ton of modules prefixed with !
> in rc.conf by default. Not at the box currently but it was 5-7 modules
> listed. This will have to be changed.
>
> Also, this functionality has worked the same way for the e
I recently did a fresh install and noticed a ton of modules prefixed with !
in rc.conf by default. Not at the box currently but it was 5-7 modules
listed. This will have to be changed.
Also, this functionality has worked the same way for the entire time that
I've used Arch. That is since 2003 and
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 1:19 PM, Richard Schütz wrote:
> ood idea, as some applications still need it. For example escputil, which is
> shipped with gutenprint, needs usblp to read the ink levels from some EPSON
> printers. So only blacklisting it by default seems to be the better way.
Thanks for
Am 29.05.2011 12:52, schrieb Tom Gundersen:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Casey Peter wrote:
Also !usblp for those of us with USB printer issues. (especially HP usb
inkjets)
Yup, blacklist it in /etc/modprobe.d (we should probably fix this once
and for all, I believe other distro's simp
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 6:56 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> No. I was saying that only load-modules.sh/initscripts should parse
> the MODULES array directly (Oon-ee was suggesting that udev rules
> might rely on the MODULES array).
>
> Once we make this change, then blacklisting in rc.conf will become
On 05/29/2011 04:52 AM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Casey Peter wrote:
Also !usblp for those of us with USB printer issues. (especially HP usb
inkjets)
Yup, blacklist it in /etc/modprobe.d (we should probably fix this once
and for all, I believe other distro's simp
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Auguste Pop wrote:
> On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
>> I have not found any uses of the MODULES array like you describe (if
>> they exist they should be considered bugs though, the MODULES array
>> was not meant to be used in this way). How
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Casey Peter wrote:
> Also !usblp for those of us with USB printer issues. (especially HP usb
> inkjets)
Yup, blacklist it in /etc/modprobe.d (we should probably fix this once
and for all, I believe other distro's simply removed this module, but
haven't had time
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> I have not found any uses of the MODULES array like you describe (if
> they exist they should be considered bugs though, the MODULES array
> was not meant to be used in this way). However, if anyone knows of
> any, then please let me know.
>
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
>> On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
>>> Thanks for your Oon-ee.
>>>
>>> Sun, May 29, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 9:16 PM, Tom Gundersen
On 05/29/2011 04:32 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
Thanks for your Oon-ee.
Sun, May 29, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 9:16 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
rc.conf - MODULE
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
>> Thanks for your Oon-ee.
>>
>> Sun, May 29, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
>>> On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 9:16 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
>>>
rc.conf - MODULES(!mod1, !mod2): blackli
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> Thanks for your Oon-ee.
>
> Sun, May 29, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
>> On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 9:16 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
>>
>>> rc.conf - MODULES(!mod1, !mod2): blacklisting modules in the modules
>>> array will no longer have
Thanks for your Oon-ee.
Sun, May 29, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 9:16 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
>
>> rc.conf - MODULES(!mod1, !mod2): blacklisting modules in the modules
>> array will no longer have any effect. modprobe already provides two
>> different ways of p
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 9:16 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> rc.conf - MODULES(!mod1, !mod2): blacklisting modules in the modules
> array will no longer have any effect. modprobe already provides two
> different ways of preventing modules from being loaded, so this is
> just a matter of updating some
20 matches
Mail list logo
