From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
	by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.77)
	(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-53284-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1SpMKi-0004IW-MH
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 16:33:40 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 70629E04CB;
	Thu, 12 Jul 2012 16:33:17 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E44EE049A
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 16:32:28 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (unknown [200.89.69.133])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	(Authenticated sender: aballier)
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 37FE41B4005
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 16:32:27 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 12:30:59 -0400
From: Alexis Ballier <aballier@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: udev-rules.eclass
Message-ID: <20120712123059.4474562e@gentoo.org>
In-Reply-To: <1342064464.14617.7.camel@big_daddy.dol-sen.ca>
References: <20120711191142.GA26844@linux1>
 <20120711165911.1428ddb6@gentoo.org>
 <20120711234808.GB27226@linux1>
 <1342064464.14617.7.camel@big_daddy.dol-sen.ca>
Organization: Gentoo
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: f99dbce4-bca8-4201-8d72-33686dadf671
X-Archives-Hash: bfce1d01d42848bc17b05184619e466e

On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 20:41:04 -0700
Brian Dolbec <dolsen@gentoo.org> wrote:

> 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. 
[...]

how do you handle the package manager database containing the location
of the file ?

A.