On Sep 30, Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> N.B. Currently a module that is blacklisted for hotplug (i.e. its name
> is listed in /etc/hotplug/blacklist or in a file in
> /etc/hotplug/blacklist.d/) can still be loaded on boot by adding its
> name to /etc/modules. For backward compatibilit
> Anyway, I implemented support for /etc/hotplug/blacklist.d/ in modprobe...
N.B. Currently a module that is blacklisted for hotplug (i.e. its name
is listed in /etc/hotplug/blacklist or in a file in
/etc/hotplug/blacklist.d/) can still be loaded on boot by adding its
name to /etc/modules. For ba
Quoting Marco d'Itri ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Everybody who has apt-listchanges installed, for a start.
> And if they don't, too bad for them.
Well, I agree that people using unstable really should install
apt-listchanges.
However, what about testing and future stable users?
Our installer does n
On Sep 27, Eldon Koyle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've had a fair amount of trouble with hotplug loading modules that
> cause a kernel panic (esp. on laptops). In this case, what would you
> recommend as a replacement for blacklisting?
module-init-tools blacklisting.
Anyway, I implemented sup
On Sep 19 18:25+0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Sep 19, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's arguable how much drivers blacklisting is critical.
I've had a fair amount of trouble with hotplug loading modules that
cause a kernel panic (esp. on laptops). In this case,
On Sep 21, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The absolute minimum functional upgrade path is to Conflict: with all
> package versions providing old-style blacklists, and to abort early in
> preinst with a loud warning if any user-specified blacklists are present on
> the system (muc
Marco D'Itri wrote:
It's arguable how much drivers blacklisting is critical.
It's uncommon for users to do it, and as long as they read the
NEWS.Debian email before rebooting nothing bad will happen anyway.
Almost every time a user does it, it's because it's critical. You cannot
expect users
* sean finney [Mon, 19 Sep 2005 06:13:30 -0400]:
> echo "# user defined blacklists converted from hotplug" > $tmpfile
> cat $blacklist_files | grep -vE '^[[:space:]]*#' | \
> sed -ne 's/^\(.*\)/install \1 /bin/true' > $tmpfile
> ucf $tmpfi
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 18:25:39 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) wrote:
>On Sep 19, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Easily done. Conflict with all packages providing blacklist entries by
>> themselves, and convert everything else. This will keep things safe for
>> si
On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 06:25:39PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > Please correct me if I am wrong, but the script conversion will be necessary
> > for a proper upgrade path from sarge to etch anyway, and thus such stuff is
> > *non-optional*.
> It's arguable how much drivers blacklisting is critic
On Sep 19, Hendrik Sattler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> *urgs*, I really hope that this does not mean to get rid of the hotplug
> package!
No, but I expect that more and more packages in the future will require
udev.
> There are people who like a static /dev and still want hotplug to
> properly
Marco d'Itri wrote:
> udev (0.070-3) unstable; urgency=low
>
> * hotplug and coldplug support has been merged in the udev package,
> which
> will load all the drivers needed as the beginning of the boot process
> and handle hotplug events later.
> The hotplug package has been disa
On Sep 19, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Easily done. Conflict with all packages providing blacklist entries by
> themselves, and convert everything else. This will keep things safe for
> sid/etch users at low cost (a few conflicts you have already tracked down
> anywa
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > is it really that complicated? unless i'm missing something, wouldn't
> > it be as simple as
> For a start, only user-written files should be converted.
Easily done. Conflict with all packages providing blacklist entries by
themselves, and convert eve
On Sep 19, sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> is it really that complicated? unless i'm missing something, wouldn't
> it be as simple as
For a start, only user-written files should be converted.
> (of course provided for proper handling of tmpfile generation and a
> debconf prompt, i guess
unless i'm missing something, wouldn't
it be as simple as
echo "# user defined blacklists converted from hotplug" > $tmpfile
cat $blacklist_files | grep -vE '^[[:space:]]*#' | \
sed -ne 's/^\(.*\)/install \1 /bin/true' > $tmpfile
ucf $tmpfile
On Sep 19, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What about user-installed blacklists? Will the new packages at least try to
> convert these from blacklist format to modprobe format?
No (but feel free to send code to do it).
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> The new hotplug subsystem cannot handle blacklisting anymore, and now
> delegates it to modprobe.
> modprobe uses a different syntax, so the old /etc/hotplug/blacklist*
> files are not supported anymore.
What about user-installed blacklists? Will the new
The new hotplug subsystem cannot handle blacklisting anymore, and now
delegates it to modprobe.
modprobe uses a different syntax, so the old /etc/hotplug/blacklist*
files are not supported anymore.
Considering that the other distributions have no plans to keep
supporting hotplug-style blacklisting
19 matches
Mail list logo