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

Eric Belanger belanger at ASTRO.UMontreal.CA
Sat Sep 6 14:37:20 EDT 2008

On Sat, 30 Aug 2008, Aaron Griffin wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 4:28 AM, Xavier <shiningxc at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 1:45 AM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> start_udev is still there because people were jackasses and didn't
>>> update initscripts when they updated udev.... or something.. I can't
>>> remember the issue, but it was people being foolish and expecting
>>> their systems to boot fine.
>>> Is everyone ok with removing it?
>> A suggestion was made 3 times to simply add a conflict line :
>> http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/11112#comment31331
>> This is just a safety against foolish people.
> Added locally.
> Copied from arch-general (whoops, replied to the wrong list) regarding
> the readme file we ship with the udev package
>> Actually, I think we should remove this file. Reloading rules and all
>> that is covered by the man pages and any arch specific documentation
>> should be added to a wiki page so anyone can edit it.
>> Any issues with removing this? We don't ship custom readme's with any
>> other packages that I know of.

I do ship a custom readme for qingy. At first, I was pointing people to 
the wiki article I had created. Then, I got somewhat uneasy about having 
to rely on a document that anyone can edit (qingy is a login manager so 
it's somewhat critical) even though I was receiving email notification 
everytime the article was edited. Therefore, I put the wiki info in a 
readme. In the case of udev, if you want to rely on the wiki, someone 
should watch the article edits carefully.

> Additionally, do we need the migrate-udev script anymore? I sincerely
> hope not. Any qualms with killing THAT off too?

This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list