[arch-dev-public] Risky business: udev upgrade

Thomas Bächler thomas at archlinux.org
Thu Sep 4 04:05:21 EDT 2008

Aaron Griffin schrieb:
> Some followups here. tpowa went ahead and handled a few of the changes
> I was discussing here, but there are a few more before I push this to
> testing.

I hope I can make the changes to load-modules.sh soon to make 
blacklisting work in a reasonable way. See 

> Firstly:
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Damjan Georgievski <gdamjan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> And, 51-arch.rules is being installed in /etc/udev/rules.d. Shouldn't it go
>>> in the new location?
>> Probably not, the idea about rules in /lib/udev/ is that those are the
>> stock rules as shipped with udev. And any distro or system rules would
>> go to /etc/udev/rules.d/ (anything that's not stock).
>> There's some info here: http://lwn.net/Articles/293689/
> So I've moved 81-arch.rules back to /etc. There should be no need to
> recompile applications, as those rules should still go to /etc

That depends on how you define "stock rules". Usually, the files in 
/etc/ are there for the user to be changed. However, our rules are not 
there to be changed, that's what the user creates his own rule files for.

Now I don't see that we should make any difference between rules shipped 
upstream by udev and rules added by Arch. My opinion here is that /lib 
is for the distribution and the package manager and /etc is for the 
user. Therefore, Arch's rules should be in the same place as udev's 
upstream rules.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 260 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/attachments/20080904/41d53a8f/attachment.pgp>

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list