Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: udev-rules.eclass

[Brian Dolbec <dolsen@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1102 bytes --]

On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 18:48 -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 04:59:11PM -0400, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > How do you plan to handle the following: 
> > - foo installs an udev rule
> > - install foo with old udev
> > - upgrade udev
> > 
> > are rules installed by foo used by new udev ?
> 
> No, they wouldn't be; that is a good reason to question the value of the
> eclass itself. Maybe the correct way to do this is to forget the eclass
> and just file bugs against packages that break having them move their
> rules to the new location and set a dependency on the newer udev.
> 
> This would have to be a rev bump for the broken packages.
> 
> William
> 
> > 
> > A.
> > 

So, does that mean the rule itself changes or just the location change
is needed?

If it is just a location change, a fairly simple udev-updater script
would do it.  If the pkg needs to be re-compiled to work with/depend on
the new udev, then a more complex script would be needed.  One more
along the line of python-updater/perl-cleaner.
-- 
Brian Dolbec <dolsen@gentoo.org>

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]