On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 20:44, Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 2008-07-10 at 10:21 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote: >> On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 23:50 +0200, Kay Sievers wrote: >> > On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 21:48, Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > > Marco d'Itri (md@xxxxxxxx) said: >> > >> On Jul 03, Harald Hoyer <harald@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > >> >> > >> > With recent changes, udev processes "change" events for removable devices >> > >> > and resets the permissions, if it has changed since creation. Is this >> > >> > intended? Or do we just want a new vol_id symlink? >> > >> I think this is intended: manually changing the permissions of dynamic >> > >> devices is not supposed to work. >> > > >> > > ....? How do you handle ACLs for local users, then? >> > >> > Re-apply them, with the same logic that did it in the first place? >> >> Racy. The ACL's are applied long after udev stopped processing rules. >> Better to fix udev to only apply permissions on "add" events. > > We should just leave the perms and ownership as they are, if they > already match the udev values, in the same way we preserve the inode. > > That way all ACL's are preserved, and hooking into "change" to set > permissions will still work. > > Does the following work for you? Care to check the changes in the udev git tree? Thanks, Kay -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hotplug" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
