Re: Q: device(file) permissions for USB

[Rene Rebe <rene.rebe@gmx.net>]

On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:27:22 -0800
Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 10:30:50PM +0100, Rene Rebe wrote:
> > 
> > This is what I do - but IT SUCKS!! Can't the USB stuff simply use devfs so
> > I can control the permissions of this USB nodes in a very nice / cleaner
> > way I do with all my other stuff??? (In contrast to use some find -name
> > | xargs chmod ... or simillar hacks ...)
> 
> How is using devfs (and devfsd) any different in "hack level" from using
> /sbin/hotplug?

Maybe nothing in Linux should be at an hack-level I we would like to
get more desktop users ;-) (NO I'm not such a dummie user!)

Devfsd:

REGISTER snd/* PERMISSIONS root.root 666
REGISTER sound/* PERMISSIONS root.root 666

For usbfs I have to do script-hacking in /sbin/hotplug (I do not know
how I did it since it is on my brothers box somewhere at the other
end of Germany ... - but is was some if [$1 = "usb"]; then; chmod
or maybe even some find /proc -name "xyz..." ...). Especially because
I only got one parameter ($1 == usb?) the rest was empty. So even
providing filesnames what got hot-plugged would be nice.

> usbdevfs does not require devfs, which enables the majority of Linux
> users to actually use it.

Wouldn't it be nicer to use devfs and add this procfs hack for the
"major dists"? - They could even mount devfs to /devfs and so use
all the old-way in /dev and only use devfs for the usb stuff.

I do not know why they adapt so slowly to such a cool technology
anyway ...

> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

k33p h4ck1n6
  René

-- 
René Rebe (Registered Linux user: #248718 <http://counter.li.org>)

eMail:    rene.rebe@gmx.net
          rene@rocklinux.org

Homepage: http://www.tfh-berlin.de/~s712059/index.html

Anyone sending unwanted advertising e-mail to this address will be
charged $25 for network traffic and computing time. By extracting my
address from this message or its header, you agree to these terms.