[suggest] Fix for fuse-2.7.4-1.rf.src.rpm
dag at wieers.com
Sun Jun 28 02:00:47 CEST 2009
On Sat, 27 Jun 2009, Joe Steele wrote:
> On 6/26/2009, Dag Wieers wrote:
>> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009, Joe Steele wrote:
>> > The patch file should look like this:
>> > --- util/udev.rules 2005-11-03 19:38:05.000000000 +0100
>> > +++ util/udev.rules 2005-11-03 19:38:13.000000000 +0100
>> > @@ -1 +1 @@
>> > -KERNEL=="fuse", MODE="0666"
>> > +KERNEL="fuse", NAME="%k", MODE="0660",OWNER="root",GROUP="fuse"
>> Not quite right. If you do 'man udev' you can find out what the difference
>> is between '=' and '=='.
>> == Compare for equality.
>> = Asign a value to a key. Keys that represent a list, are
>> reset and only this single value is assigned.
>> If you look at other files in /etc/udev/rules.d/, you can see that this is
>> on purposes. The parts with '==' are filters, and when they match, the
>> parts with '=' are being assigned.
> Your point is well taken. Upon further checking, the syntax for udev rules
> changed with udev version 055. Here's a link to the release notes for that
> version (a long link that may get wrapped):
> So, for a CentOS-5 system with udev version 095, my "fix" is inappropriate,
> just as you noted.
> However, for a CentOS-4 system with udev version 039, the fix is necessary.
> Without it, group ownership of /dev/fuse does not get set to group "fuse" as
> intended by the patch.
Right, that makes a lot of sense. I should not jump to conclusions like
that or assume that things weren't different with older distributions. It
could have helped if you specified that though, but that's still no excuse
> I guess to fix it correctly, the patch contents should depend on the target
> distribution (and its version of udev) for which the RPM is being built.
I will fix it, are you interested to test it out ?
-- dag wieers, dag at wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ --
[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]
More information about the users