Arch Linux

Please read this before reporting a bug:

Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in Unsupported. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!

FS#13834 - [udev] Configurable or easy way to disable cdsymlinks script

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Tom (reztho) - Tuesday, 17 March 2009, 20:47 GMT
Last edited by Tobias Powalowski (tpowa) - Tuesday, 17 March 2009, 21:24 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages: Core
Status Closed
Assigned To Tobias Powalowski (tpowa)
Architecture All
Severity High
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No


This bug report follows what it's said in this feature request:  FS#13801 

Well, I like to have some custom cd/dvd symlinks made by the persistent cd/dvd symlinks generator rule of udev. But when the 81-arch.rules is run by udev, those symlinks will be removed.

This behaviour is expected and it's documented by the udev arch readme. But it's wrong because for changing the behaviour, the user must mess with an arch rule file.

What I'm asking is simple:
- Or a simple and not hackish way to disable the cdsymlinks script without messing with arch system rule files. Maybe forcing the script to check a file (cdsymlinks.conf?) in /etc/udev/ for a value of a variable will do the job clean.
- Or just make the cdsymlinks not to remove any previous cd/dvd symlink made by the user.
This task depends upon

Closed by  Tobias Powalowski (tpowa)
Tuesday, 17 March 2009, 21:24 GMT
Reason for closing:  Fixed
Additional comments about closing:  udev-140-1
Comment by Tobias Powalowski (tpowa) - Tuesday, 17 March 2009, 20:49 GMT
ah yes we could check on persistent cdrom rule file
Comment by Tom (reztho) - Tuesday, 17 March 2009, 20:52 GMT
Now my point is more clear I think. So if you make the two changes at the same time, I'll don't have any problem.
Comment by Tom (reztho) - Tuesday, 17 March 2009, 20:53 GMT
ermm .. I won't have any problem (sorry for my engrish).