On 17 Apr 2025, at 07:56, Gleb Popov <arr...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> 1. devfs looks like a correct solution for this
> 2. Reading the /etc/rc.d/devfs, there is no way for a port to just
> install some file that will automatically get picked up by devfs
> 2.1 Should we extend the rc script to look into, say,
> ${LOCALBASE}/etc/devfs/*.rules ?
> 3. On the other hand, the port may ask the user to run sysrc
> devfs_set_rulesets+="..." This requirement is justified, because a lot
> of other ports already ask the user to change something in
> /etc/rc.conf
> 99. Do we really need all this machinery though? Can't we just let the
> user figure out the most convenient way for him? It might be that 99%
> of users would just use sudo and be done with it.Thank you and thanks to all the others for the suggestions. I believe that 2.1should be the way to go, it would be a good thing for many ports; but I am not getting into that by now. By now I prepared the patches for tpm2-abrmd, tpm2-tools, and tpm2-tss (to make them actually work…), and file in a new port for tpm2-openssl; everything sticking to your point 99. Right now the three things are compiling and running my private regression tests, it’s going to take one hour or so if all the tests pass. May I ask anyone to confirm that the proper way to submit them is a PR for each port on bugzilla attaching a “git diff”? Thanks, A.
