On Dienstag, 4. September 2007, Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
> On Samstag, 1. September 2007, Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
> > On Samstag, 1. September 2007, Daniel Drake wrote:
> > > I like the idea of adding this to CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK.
>
> Ok seems we should do this! Next udev ebuild will add rules
On Samstag, 1. September 2007, Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
> On Samstag, 1. September 2007, Daniel Drake wrote:
> > I like the idea of adding this to CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK.
> >
Ok seems we should do this! Next udev ebuild will add rules directory to
CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK.
I also tested now what happe
On Samstag, 1. September 2007, Daniel Drake wrote:
> I like the idea of adding this to CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK.
>
> Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
> > Only problem I see: What to do with people having custom modifications
> > inside the default rules-files?
>
> I can't think of any cases where the user wou
I like the idea of adding this to CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK.
Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
Only problem I see: What to do with people having custom modifications inside
the default rules-files?
I can't think of any cases where the user would have to do this (they
can make custom modifications in their
On Freitag, 31. August 2007, Tobias Klausmann wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Friday 31 August 2007, Marius Mauch wrote:
> >> Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> Matthias Schwarzott kirjoitti:
> On Freitag, 31. August 2007, Matthias Schwarzott wrote
On Fri, 2007-08-31 at 18:13 +0200, Tobias Klausmann wrote:
> I find the persisten-net-generator.rules particularly annoying
> (for various reasons including, but not limited to system images
> and system cloning).
>
> So I have an empty file of that name and happily nuke whatever
> comes along wi
Hi!
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday 31 August 2007, Marius Mauch wrote:
>> Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Matthias Schwarzott kirjoitti:
On Freitag, 31. August 2007, Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
> What do you think about adding /etc/udev/rules.d/ to
On Friday 31 August 2007, Marius Mauch wrote:
> Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Matthias Schwarzott kirjoitti:
> > > On Freitag, 31. August 2007, Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
> > >> Hi there!
> > >>
> > >> What do you think about adding /etc/udev/rules.d/ to
> > >> CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK. Th
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 16:12:52 +0300
Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matthias Schwarzott kirjoitti:
> > On Freitag, 31. August 2007, Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
> >> Hi there!
> >>
> >> What do you think about adding /etc/udev/rules.d/ to
> >> CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK. This will no longer bother
Matthias Schwarzott kirjoitti:
> On Freitag, 31. August 2007, Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
>> Hi there!
>>
>> What do you think about adding /etc/udev/rules.d/ to CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK.
>> This will no longer bother the user with updating these files.
>> Thus it will reduce the number of bugs triggered
On Freitag, 31. August 2007, Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
> Hi there!
>
> What do you think about adding /etc/udev/rules.d/ to CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK.
> This will no longer bother the user with updating these files.
> Thus it will reduce the number of bugs triggered by forgotten config-file
> updates.
>
On Friday 31 of August 2007 12:37:57 Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
> What do you think about adding /etc/udev/rules.d/ to CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK.
That's what I did locally so fine by me.
--
Best Regards,
Piotr Jaroszyński
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Hi there!
What do you think about adding /etc/udev/rules.d/ to CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK.
This will no longer bother the user with updating these files.
Thus it will reduce the number of bugs triggered by forgotten config-file
updates.
If user needs home-brewn rules he is requested to add own files, a
13 matches
Mail list logo
