Richard A Downing wrote these words on 10/25/05 12:16 CST: > Should we ask the LFS guys to take that out of their rules, so that we > can deal with it in BLFS?
I am against that idea because the device nodes are going to be created regardless if there is a rule or not. Only thing is if LFS doesn't define the rules, then the nodes are created with the default root:root ownership with permissions that won't allow an unprivileged user to access them. Of course, the ALSA instructions in BLFS could have a section to "fix" the rules file and then restart udev. But that seems silly when the ALSA driver is installed with the kernel, which is installed by LFS. This now appears to be a continuation of the previous threads on LFS-Dev about should or should not LFS define rules. -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.10 i686] 12:20:01 up 30 days, 20:44, 3 users, load average: 1.24, 1.06, 0.78 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
