Re: udev device naming policy concerns
On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 08:47:09AM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> Package: udev
> Version: 0.022-1
> Severity: serious
(Please use X-Debbugs-Cc: so that those of us reading via debian-devel
get the bug number.)
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 04:07:22PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > Oh, cripes, lets not again. Read the rest of this thread. The default,
> > as determined by the package maintainer after feedback, is the
^^^^^^
> > traditional flat /dev layout, as used by pretty much every other
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > distribution out there (yes, I know there are exceptions, please don't
> > bother to list them.)
>
> Let me point out that Debian Policy (as well as the Linux Standard
> Base, which many other distributions are certified against), requires
> the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard, and quoting from
> /usr/share/doc/debian-policy/fhs/fhs.txt.gz:
>
> 6.1.2 /dev : Devices and special files
>
> All devices and special files in /dev should adhere to the Linux
> Allocated Devices document, which is available with the Linux kernel
> source. It is maintained by H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>.
>
> This can be found here:
>
> http://www.lanana.org/docs/device-list/devices.txt
>
> .... and you can see that it specifies the flat namespace.
[...]
> Hence, the udev package, as currently configured by default, violates
> Debian policy, and as such, this is a release-critical bug which
> **MUST** be fixed.
Huh? As noted above, udev *does* use the flat namespace.
udev (0.022-1) unstable; urgency=medium
[...]
* Switched the default /dev layout to traditional style.
(Closes: #237482, #237484)
[...]
-- Marco d'Itri <md@linux.it> Sun, 21 Mar 2004 13:31:02 +0100
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: