On Montag, 9. November 2009, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-08-30 at 16:11 +0200, Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
> > Hi there!
>
> A late hello,
>
> > Second point: udev-145 bundles a lot of new extras, but they can only be
> > enabled/disabled all or nothing.
> >
> > These extras are:
> > * udev-
Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
Up to now I have just added use-flag "extras" to control these. But I suppose
that udev-acl and maybe gudev is a hard requirement for newer hal or
devicekit versions. And upstream thinks these should be enabled by default.
I've been playing with Fedora lately and the
On Sun, 2009-08-30 at 16:11 +0200, Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
> Hi there!
A late hello,
> Second point: udev-145 bundles a lot of new extras, but they can only be
> enabled/disabled all or nothing.
>
> These extras are:
> * udev-acl: Apply consolekit permissions to devices for users (audio, vid
On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 10:45 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 08:16:47PM +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 7:41 PM, Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
>> > Hi there!
>> >
>> > The new udev-145 and newer have some new kernel requirements. How should
>> > the
>> >
> In summation, I say hard-enable these:
>
> acl
>
Please don't do this. It would force installation of sys-apps/acl to any user
which I think is not desired by everybody. I'd rather like to see this being
enabled by either the acl or the consolekit USE flag.
Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C)
Gentoo
On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 05:05:05PM +0200, Bruno wrote:
> Is this bound to consolekit or does it rather fall under 'acl' use-flag?
> I guess this includes a kernel requirement (ACL support for tmpfs)
Yes, this would imply CONFIG_TMPFS_POSIX_ACL to actually be used.
> > * usb-db: Provide udev-rules
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
William Hubbs wrote:
> I agree here. The eclass should check /proc/config.gz.
> Also, another reason to use the eclass is it respects KBUILD_OUTPUT if
> it is set.
- From the indenting I can't tell if you wrote this or not, however, we
need to dif
On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 08:16:47PM +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 7:41 PM, Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
> > Hi there!
> >
> > The new udev-145 and newer have some new kernel requirements. How should the
> > ebuild verify they are met?
> > Some possible ways:
> > 1. Check con
On Sun, 30 August 2009 Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
> The new udev-145 and newer have some new kernel requirements. How
> should the ebuild verify they are met?
> Some possible ways:
> 1. Check config under /usr/src/linux
/usr/src/linux is not the best place to look at...
Checks should rather be d
On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 7:41 PM, Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
> Hi there!
>
> The new udev-145 and newer have some new kernel requirements. How should the
> ebuild verify they are met?
> Some possible ways:
> 1. Check config under /usr/src/linux
> 2. Check /proc/config.gz
> 3. Print message for user
2009/8/30 Matthias Schwarzott :
> Hi there!
>
> The new udev-145 and newer have some new kernel requirements. How should the
> ebuild verify they are met?
> Some possible ways:
> 1. Check config under /usr/src/linux
> 2. Check /proc/config.gz
> 3. Print message for user in pkg_postinst
All of the
Hi there!
The new udev-145 and newer have some new kernel requirements. How should the
ebuild verify they are met?
Some possible ways:
1. Check config under /usr/src/linux
2. Check /proc/config.gz
3. Print message for user in pkg_postinst
Second point: udev-145 bundles a lot of new extras, but
12 matches
Mail list logo
