Re: [sigrok-devel] udev rules, TAG+="uaccess" desirable?

2017-03-29 Thread Uwe Hermann
Hi, thanks everyone for the discussions and proposals! I've decided to fix this via a mix of the proposed solutions, see bug #665 (now closed) for details: http://sigrok.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=665 Cheers, Uwe. -- http://hermann-uwe.de | http://randomprojects.org | http://sigrok.org

Re: [sigrok-devel] udev rules, TAG+="uaccess" desirable?

2016-12-30 Thread Karl Palsson
Gerhard Sittig wrote: > OpenOCD commit a5cff3acd377 adjusted their udev rules, > motivated by > https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2016/11/msg8.html > which recommends switching from > > MODE="664", GROUP="plugdev" > > to > > MODE="660",

Re: [sigrok-devel] udev rules, TAG+="uaccess" desirable?

2016-12-29 Thread Roland Hieber
On 29.12.2016 12:38, Stefan Bruens wrote: > Talking with my distribution/maintainers hat on, I am strictly against > changing the format here: > > 1. Adapting the current file to distribution needs is a sed 1-liner This is even a sed 1-liner in case of Martin's solution [0] :) [0]:

Re: [sigrok-devel] udev rules, TAG+="uaccess" desirable?

2016-12-27 Thread Andrzej Telszewski
On 27/12/16 19:04, Paul Fertser wrote: > I'm not trying to argue here but it would be useful to know what > modern distros are not covered by both plugdev and uaccess combined? I would have to investigate what uaccess is all about. I'm using Slackware, which is non-systemd distribution. Although

Re: [sigrok-devel] udev rules, TAG+="uaccess" desirable?

2016-12-27 Thread Paul Fertser
Hi Martin, On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 03:38:30PM +, Martin Ling wrote: > http://sigrok.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=665 > > In short, there is no rules file we can supply that will work for all > users on all distributions. I'm not trying to argue here but it would be useful to know what

Re: [sigrok-devel] udev rules, TAG+="uaccess" desirable?

2016-12-27 Thread Martin Ling
On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 03:38:30PM +, Martin Ling wrote: > > I believe someone else implemented a script to generate things from this > too, but I forget who it was or where they published it. Found it: https://github.com/s09bQ5/libsigrok/commits/remove-udev-rules This generates both udev

Re: [sigrok-devel] udev rules, TAG+="uaccess" desirable?

2016-12-27 Thread Stefan Bruens
On Dienstag, 27. Dezember 2016 15:38:30 CET Martin Ling wrote: > Hi, > > Please see the previous discussion about this issue on bug 665: > > http://sigrok.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=665 > > In short, there is no rules file we can supply that will work for all > users on all distributions. My

Re: [sigrok-devel] udev rules, TAG+="uaccess" desirable?

2016-12-27 Thread Martin Ling
Hi, Please see the previous discussion about this issue on bug 665: http://sigrok.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=665 In short, there is no rules file we can supply that will work for all users on all distributions. My proposal was that we remove the rules file entirely, and replace it with a

Re: [sigrok-devel] udev rules, TAG+="uaccess" desirable?

2016-12-27 Thread Gerhard Sittig
On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 14:03 +0100, Stefan Bruens wrote: > > On Dienstag, 27. Dezember 2016 13:02:21 CET Gerhard Sittig wrote: > > OpenOCD commit a5cff3acd377 adjusted their udev rules, motivated by > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2016/11/msg8.html > > which recommends

Re: [sigrok-devel] udev rules, TAG+="uaccess" desirable?

2016-12-27 Thread Stefan Bruens
On Dienstag, 27. Dezember 2016 13:02:21 CET Gerhard Sittig wrote: > OpenOCD commit a5cff3acd377 adjusted their udev rules, motivated by > https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2016/11/msg8.html > which recommends switching from > > MODE="664", GROUP="plugdev" > > to > >