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 ) id 1Sp9VA-0001yp-3F for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 02:51:36 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 91828E0773; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 02:51:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84922E06FE for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 02:50:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.26.5] (ip98-164-193-252.oc.oc.cox.net [98.164.193.252]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: zmedico) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CECA11B404C for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 02:50:43 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4FFE3B82.6030807@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 19:50:42 -0700 From: Zac Medico User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120607 Thunderbird/13.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: udev-rules.eclass References: <20120711191142.GA26844@linux1> <20120711165911.1428ddb6@gentoo.org> <20120711234808.GB27226@linux1> <4FFE3588.1060101@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4FFE3588.1060101@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 0cd04fc2-6eb5-4c94-badf-0b1033e04c57 X-Archives-Hash: 2a7b44dd7718fec8fb44cce018a18b55 On 07/11/2012 07:25 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote: > On 07/11/2012 07:48 PM, 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. > Perhaps a new ebuild helper would be best here? It seems no one knows > where to install udev rules in the first place (I know I didn't till a > recent version of portage yelled at me with a QA warning). > > How about dorule/newrule? I guess then we'd need the installed udev to set an environment variable via /etc/env.d, in order to control the location where the rules are installed? -- Thanks, Zac