Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling /dev/rfkill, testers wanted
Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 19:39:52
Message-Id: 531A2087.4030400@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Handling /dev/rfkill, testers wanted by Samuli Suominen
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA256
3
4 On 07/03/14 02:17 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
5 > - sys-fs/udev leaves it to root:root as:
6 >
7 > KERNEL=="rfkill", MODE="0664"
8 >
9 > - third party packages like mate-bluetooth, gnome-bluetooth install
10 > both their own udev .rules to adjust /dev/rfkill to plugdev:
11 >
12 > KERNEL=="rfkill", GROUP="plugdev", MODE="0664"
13 >
14 > So I'd like to propose some unification:
15 >
16 > I don't have a system with /dev/rfkill unfortunately to test this,
17 > but I believe we should add this to 40-gentoo.rules and create
18 > group 'rfkill':
19 >
20 > SUBSYSTEM=="rfkill", GROUP="rfkill", MODE="0664"
21 >
22 > And this line would go as /lib/udev/rules.d/70-gentoo-acl.rules (as
23 > the original filename in upstream ConsoleKit is
24 > 70-udev-acl.rules):
25 >
26 > SUBSYSTEM=="rfkill", TAG+="udev-acl"
27 >
28
29
30
31 As the other per-package rules already setting GROUP= are providing
32 an understandable legacy behaviour (iirc membership in plugdev is
33 still the de-facto way to provide access rights when no consolekit or
34 similar control method is installed), I wonder if we can skip the
35 group assignment.
36
37 - From what I know about ACL's, the 70-gentoo-acl.rules would still work
38 fine even if the group remains ":root".
39
40 Thoughts?
41
42 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
43 Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
44
45 iF4EAREIAAYFAlMaIIYACgkQ2ugaI38ACPBrRwEAgRRt12g3BQcVqfSYg1IavgQA
46 lNdW7iPqpnq84+rH4tsBAK3JAlgARTngWgDD95zXFdCMmHcLuksfwcMyNduRsY6w
47 =tMVr
48 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling /dev/rfkill, testers wanted Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o>