David Brownell wrote: > > Actually one of the goals of the hotplug framework is to avoid > requirements to have Yet Another Monitoring Daemon hanging > around wasting resources ... likewise, to avoid needing to start the > apropriate magic program before plugging in devices. >
I wouldn't call using a few K's of memory a waste of resources. The program does of course not necessarily has to be started explicitly by the user. It would be added to whatever "autostart" mechanism the user interface in question would use. >>> >>And what would the problem be with using an event distribution mechanism >>that would require the listener to have certain privileges? >> > > Another of the goals classic end-user "usability". Remember that > the original problem was how to fire up an unprivileged tool ... not > all hotplug events imply any need for privilege. Users initiate hotplug > events with just physical access privileges. When the device software > has already been set up, additional privilege shouldn't be needed. > Practically all desktop Linux distributions associates these kind of things with console ownership. If you're on the console, you are allowed access the graphics adapter, audio, floppy, cdrom, etc. devices. I don't see a problem with hotplug management following the same scheme. In fact , it _should_ follow the same scheme - wouldn't it be quite stupid if you could manage hot plug devices, but not access the floppy or cdrom?? Or does this concept have to change, too? -- Christer Palm _______________________________________________ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
