On Sun, 2012-03-25 at 13:22 +0100, Ian Malone wrote: > Or indeed, if anyone can show me where this is documented. All I've > managed to find with google are git commits and irrelevant mailing > list fragments. systemd-logind isn't documented, > /lib/udev/rules.d/70-uaccess.rules appears to deal with this, but what > I've seen so far appears to say that udev handling of this is being > deprecated for systemd, 70-uaccess.rules is in fact owned by systemd. This is the systemd handling of it. > also there are no suitable ID_ in there, which > brings me back to the question of choosing suitable names. Is there a > list of reserved names or naming rules? If you were creating > site-specific rules presumably they could go in /etc/... To have the > package for the software add its own rules would Fedora accept a new > ID_ into wherever ID_ needs to go? (70-uaccess.rules?). That is what you need, yes. AIUI, anyway. My experience with this is in the context of libconcord, which handles Harmony remote controls; Kay got ID_REMOTE_CONTROL added to udev (at the time) and 70-uaccess.rules owned by systemd (now) for libconcord to use in its udev rules file. > I assume that > setting TAG+="uaccess" directly (assuming that's what's needed, is it? > how should I know?) in a device rule would be frowned on. I believe so, yeah. The idea is to handle categories of device together so that admins can more easily customize the behaviour, I think. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
