[opensuse-factory] udev directory became symlink - not
On Wednesday 2013-06-26 09:18, coolo@suse.com wrote:
State of submit-request #180899 was changed by coolo: review -> declined Comment: found conflict of bcache-tools-0.1.g45-1.1.x86_64 with udev-204-6.1.x86_64: - /lib/udev [mode mismatch: d755 root:root, g l777 root:root]
Now, I am looking at my Factory VM and find that (prior to installation of any bcache-tools) /lib/udev is still a directory and not a symlink. Frederic, please note that rpm is still incapable of replacing a non-symlink object with a symlink object. This now means my /lib/udev is empty rather than a symlink :-/ Not that *I* am expecting breakage, but it might just be there, somewhere. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Le jeudi 27 juin 2013 à 05:35 +0200, Jan Engelhardt a écrit :
On Wednesday 2013-06-26 09:18, coolo@suse.com wrote:
State of submit-request #180899 was changed by coolo: review -> declined Comment: found conflict of bcache-tools-0.1.g45-1.1.x86_64 with udev-204-6.1.x86_64: - /lib/udev [mode mismatch: d755 root:root, g l777 root:root]
Now, I am looking at my Factory VM and find that (prior to installation of any bcache-tools) /lib/udev is still a directory and not a symlink.
Frederic, please note that rpm is still incapable of replacing a non-symlink object with a symlink object.
Nothing really news here, unfortunately.. Udev is able to read both /lib/udev and /usr/lib/udev, so I didn't migrate files using a %post script in udev package. But there is a prein script which should remove ude This is why systemd package is doing the move when upgrading, using a trigger. Maybe I should replace the trigger with a systematic check in % post.. Having /lib/udev isn't reall
.
--
Frederic Crozat
Le jeudi 27 juin 2013 à 05:35 +0200, Jan Engelhardt a écrit :
On Wednesday 2013-06-26 09:18, coolo@suse.com wrote:
State of submit-request #180899 was changed by coolo: review -> declined Comment: found conflict of bcache-tools-0.1.g45-1.1.x86_64 with udev-204-6.1.x86_64: - /lib/udev [mode mismatch: d755 root:root, g l777 root:root]
Now, I am looking at my Factory VM and find that (prior to installation of any bcache-tools) /lib/udev is still a directory and not a symlink.
Frederic, please note that rpm is still incapable of replacing a non-symlink object with a symlink object.
This now means my /lib/udev is empty rather than a symlink :-/ Not that *I* am expecting breakage, but it might just be there, somewhere.
Nothing really news here, unfortunately..
Udev is able to read both /lib/udev and /usr/lib/udev, so having stuff
in /lib/udev isn't a issue (unlike with systemd which will ignore stuff
from /lib/systemd/system).
Udev package will take care of migration, only if /usr/lib/udev doesn't
exist (ie old layout).
Maybe we should add a check for /lib/udev being empty and replace the
directory by symlink (there is already logic for part of that in udev
package, but only for initial migration).
--
Frederic Crozat
Frederic Crozat wrote:
Maybe we should add a check for /lib/udev being empty and replace the directory by symlink (there is already logic for part of that in udev package, but only for initial migration).
What's the point of having a symlink there? It's only packages that put files in there so the location should be fixed in those packages. cu Ludwig -- (o_ Ludwig Nussel //\ V_/_ http://www.suse.de/ SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Le jeudi 27 juin 2013 à 17:20 +0200, Ludwig Nussel a écrit :
Frederic Crozat wrote:
Maybe we should add a check for /lib/udev being empty and replace the directory by symlink (there is already logic for part of that in udev package, but only for initial migration).
What's the point of having a symlink there? It's only packages that put files in there so the location should be fixed in those packages.
For packages built / downloaded outside OBS..
So we could drop support for /lib/udev in udev (and only read
from /usr/lib/udev..).
--
Frederic Crozat
Frederic Crozat wrote:
Le jeudi 27 juin 2013 à 17:20 +0200, Ludwig Nussel a écrit :
Frederic Crozat wrote:
Maybe we should add a check for /lib/udev being empty and replace the directory by symlink (there is already logic for part of that in udev package, but only for initial migration).
What's the point of having a symlink there? It's only packages that put files in there so the location should be fixed in those packages.
For packages built / downloaded outside OBS..
So we could drop support for /lib/udev in udev (and only read from /usr/lib/udev..).
Are there actually any important real world cases? I mean this is not about .desktop files but low level udev rules. So to me this looks like just drop the directory and don't bother. cu Ludwig -- (o_ Ludwig Nussel //\ V_/_ http://www.suse.de/ SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Le vendredi 28 juin 2013 à 09:12 +0200, Ludwig Nussel a écrit :
Frederic Crozat wrote:
Le jeudi 27 juin 2013 à 17:20 +0200, Ludwig Nussel a écrit :
Frederic Crozat wrote:
Maybe we should add a check for /lib/udev being empty and replace the directory by symlink (there is already logic for part of that in udev package, but only for initial migration).
What's the point of having a symlink there? It's only packages that put files in there so the location should be fixed in those packages.
For packages built / downloaded outside OBS..
So we could drop support for /lib/udev in udev (and only read from /usr/lib/udev..).
Are there actually any important real world cases? I mean this is not about .desktop files but low level udev rules. So to me this looks like just drop the directory and don't bother.
That's the issue. We won't know until we drop it :(
--
Frederic Crozat
On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 09:12:41 +0200
Ludwig Nussel
Are there actually any important real world cases? I mean this is not about .desktop files but low level udev rules. So to me this looks like just drop the directory and don't bother.
cu Ludwig
I agree where with Ludwig, we need to find all apps which dump stuff in /lib/udev and move them to /usr/lib/udev. Same thing should apply for /var/{run,lock} to be moved in /run and /run/lock. -- Robert Milasan L3 Support Engineer SUSE Linux (http://www.suse.com) email: rmilasan@suse.com GPG fingerprint: B6FE F4A8 0FA3 3040 3402 6FE7 2F64 167C 1909 6D1A -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
El 28/06/13 04:04, Robert Milasan escribió:
I agree where with Ludwig, we need to find all apps which dump stuff in /lib/udev and move them to /usr/lib/udev.
I already did that, current packages.FL.gz reports that there are no packages in factory using /lib/udev/rules.d anymore. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
participants (5)
-
Cristian Rodríguez -
Frederic Crozat -
Jan Engelhardt -
Ludwig Nussel -
Robert Milasan