Re: systemd prerelease 247-rc2

[Lennart Poettering <lennart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Do, 12.11.20 16:36, Michael Biebl (mbiebl@xxxxxxxxx) wrote:

> I have to admit, it's unclear to me, what exactly this change means.
> As far as udev_device_has_tag() is concerned, it seems the Debian
> archive only ships one package (plymouth) which makes use of it.
> https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=udev_device_has_tag+package%3A%5CQplymouth%5CE&literal=1
>
> But what about all those packages shipping udev rules files. Does this
> new concept of sticky device tags affect them?

Some probably.

Note that not all subsystems use "bind"/"unbind" actions, so they get
away with not handling that properly. But it's still ugly to not write
the right action matches.

That said, many 3rd party udev rules files I looked at couldn#t even
handle "change" events properly, that are fired at arbitrary times.

> And if so, in what way?

There's no nice way. Depends on the subsystem.

You could start by going through the udev rules files of your
distros. 95% of the rules files that use a guard different from
ACTION!="remove" are possibly broken, or at least ugly (and not future
proof).

Lennart

--
Lennart Poettering, Berlin
_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel