Re: Policy for devfs support
On Sat, 26 Mar 2005, Roger Leigh wrote:
> Is there a project-wide policy for support for devfs (and devfs-style,
> e.g. udev devfs.rules) device naming?
Do it if you can. It is not mandated anywhere, but it is clearly a very good
idea. We should even make it a *may* in policy to stress this, I suppose.
Most maintainers (AFAIK) have been slowly changing their packages to support
devfs-like naming schemes or user-configurable naming of devices (which is
> I'm asking because of obstruction (from upstream) regarding the
> application of a simple patch to allow yaboot to support it:
> If there was a definite policy of supporting it (or not), this would
> be easier. As it stands, the tool is not properly functional on devfs
> systems. Since we should aim to support a well-integrated system, I'm
> not happy that folks can deliberately obstruct furthering the
> integration of the system.
They cannot. You can override upstream on this with a clear conscience, it
*is* on the role-call of the downstream maintainer to tweak things like
this, and we do it all the time.
But let me suggest you a better, much more friendly solution:
Enhance the program so that it can be configured to use the first sucessfull
open of a *list* of user-supplied devices (or, if that is too intrusive, to
support a single user-configured device, and add a shell wrapper that tries
to detect which device to use, like I did with rng-tools in sid (see its
Make the hardcoded default be /dev/nvram, of course.
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot