On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> sed -i -e 's/SYSFS/ATTR/g' /etc/udev/rules.d/* > > I doubt that will solve your root problem correctly I created a rule many years ago that set the group to "usb" for a custom FPGA board my coworkers created. I decided to use udev as the mechanism by which the "group" was set to "usb" for a no-good-reason: I just read it somewhere on google. I'm willing (and prefer) to learn the proper way from an official source, but I just didn't know where to turn. When I created that rule many years ago I used "SYSFS" in the udev rule to specify the idVendor and idProduct of the device I was using. Apparently that was not correct or is no longer correct. The correct approach is to use "ATTR". Again this is from google, not from me reading the udev manual. So when I updated my OS, the invalid rule was not processed. This manifested itself as "my device is not a member of the 'usb' group". I naturally wondered "well then which group is it a member of?" And this lead to my question here. And eventually to my solution: sed -i -e 's/SYSFS/ATTR/g' /etc/udev/rules.d/* I didn't execute sed on all the files (as I implied here) just the one rule that I created in error. I think you are cautioning me because you felt I made a change to a bunch of system files provided by my distribution? If so thank you and I apologize for the misleading quote. If not, I'm still curious about your caution. Thank you again, Chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
