[arch-dev-public] [signoff] udev-118-5

Aaron Griffin aaronmgriffin at gmail.com
Tue Mar 11 14:27:37 EDT 2008

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Thomas Bächler <thomas at archlinux.org> wrote:
> Aaron Griffin schrieb:
> > On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 2:59 AM, Thomas Bächler <thomas at archlinux.org> wrote:
>  >> Tobias Powalowski schrieb:
>  >>  > - added framebuffer_blacklist file
>  >>
>  >>  I thought we wanted to do that with udev rule files by blacklisting
>  >>  modaliases. Did I miss something?
>  >
>  > If by "we" you mean that you mentioned it to me over jabber, then
>  > sure. But no one ever brought it up anywhere else. As far as I know
>  > you mentioned it to me, I mentioned it to tpowa, and it basically got
>  > lost in the shuffle. That's why I always ask people to "please bring
>  > this up on the ML" when you send me things over jabber.
>  The idea was posted in a followup on the arch-general list by a user
>  (you replied to it there). Sure, everyone agreed that it was a cool
>  idea, but I must have forgot to state my approval on the mailing list.

Oh yeah, I just replied that it was a neat idea. I didn't really think
of it one way or another.

>  So let's bring it up now, shouldn't we rather use udev rules than a
>  modprobe.d file?

I'm really ambivalent about this. I think it's easier to autogenerate
the modprobe.d file, and it doesn't need to be regenerated every time
the modules change (in the off chance that new modaliases are added to
the modules).

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list