Jan Evert van Grootheest escribió:
>> And yeah, works fine, but I must add the "ENV{PATH}="
>> directive on each
>> and every udev rule that runs a program, and that is far from a good
>> solution (plus bloats the rules files a lot).
>>
>> Anyone with a broader perspective can suggest a better solution?
>>
>> Best regards.
>>
>> P.S: I'm using FC6 for my desktop and noticed that it does
>> not deal with
>> the PATH environment variable wherever it executes a program
>> in a rule.
>> Has red hat patched udev?, or is it just that all external
>> programs take
>> care of this themselves? (if the program is a shell script,
>> it can set
>> the PATH right at the start, if the program is an executable
>> binary, it
>> is ok not to have a PATH as long as you don't call other external
>> programs as busybox's ifup does...)
>>
>
> My guess would be that FC6 uses bash and bash has a reasonable /etc/profile
> setup.
>
That might be the explanation.
> So perhaps you should check that your udevd is started from a reasonable
> environment?
>
I just did, and the PATH variable is properly set from where the udevd
daemon is lanuched (/etc/init.d/rcS).
However, I'm not quite sure udevd passing along its startuo environment
to "RUN+=" programs is the right solution. It might "pollute" the
programs environment and provide a non deterministic execution
evironment: in other word, the "RUN+=" outcome may depend on factors not
under the udev subsystem control (i.e. the environment set when the
udevd daemon is started).
> -- Jan Evert
>
>
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
[email protected]
http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/busybox
