Hello all, David Zeuthen [2009-06-04 11:21 -0400]: > This looks good. But how about setting ID_GPHOTO2=1 instead of hoping > that we'll always set GPHOTO2_DRIVER? Not important I guess, just think > it's nicer that way...
It's not more or less reliable than setting GPHOTO2_DRIVER, but indeed
the ID_FOO=1 schema is pretty common nowadays, so I agree about the
"niceness".
> > # mark for automatic ACL management
> > ENV{GPHOTO2_DRIVER}=="?*", ENV{ACL_MANAGE}="1"
>
> This probably shouldn't be in gphoto2 but in udev-extras instead
> (separate policy from mechanism and allows us to change how ACLs are
> handled in the future). Kay, what do you think?
I updated the patch on the upstream bug accordingly.
Kay Sievers [2009-06-04 17:29 +0200]:
> The ACL_MANAGE trigger should be in udev only and not in the gphoto
> rules, it's udev "policy stuff" which should not leak into generic
> infrastructure. We do the same for scanners already in the udev acl
> rules:
> ENV{libsane_matched}=="yes", ENV{ACL_MANAGE}="1"
Ack. I'll commit that to udev-extras once I get some feedback from
Marcus and the patch makes it into upstream.
Thanks!
Martin
--
Martin Pitt | http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Developer (www.debian.org)
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ devkit-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/devkit-devel
