On Thu, 10 Sep 2026 16:08:40 +0200 Niels Thykier <[email protected]> wrote:
> As I understand the situation, the unexpected breakage has been very > limited (<20) and has surfaced as FTBFS bugs (that is, loud breakage as > opposed to silent breakage). Additionally, every case known has already > been resolved. Just noting that this triggered #1150179 as well, which is not an FTBFS. I'm adding a workaround to libgphoto2. You may well argue that udev rules should not contain such comments, but this is what we have now. > All combined, makes it unclear to me that reverting is the best way > forward. I'm not saying it is, only providing an additional data point. -- Regards, Feri.
