Am 10.05.2011 15:02, schrieb Dave Reisner:
I'm going to argue that we should be going the install /bin/false route, as it more accurately mimics what we currently do with load-modules.sh. This does have the drawback that if a user really does in fact want to install a given module, they need to run modprobe with -i. I don't recall if load-modules.sh allows explicit installation of a "blacklisted" module.
'blacklist' is fine. It usually only blacklists aliases of a module, but udev uses 'modprobe -b', which blacklists the module name as well - this is the behaviour I was trying to mimic with load-modules.sh.
As I mentioned to you on your GH pull request, I'm still a bit weary of starting up a symlink farming business in /run. I would love to see module-init-tools support for reading from /run/modprobe.d, but perhaps that's a bit of an exotic request. With the FHS revived and gearing up for a release, it seems likely that /run will be standardized, but I'm not sure if that has any clout here.
If we could just have a statement like include /run/modprobe.d/ in a modprobe config file. At least nothing like this is documented.
semi-random aside: does anyone other than systemd support /etc/modules-load.d?
What is that supposed to do?