Re: [FFADO-devel] udev rules for audio devices

[Jonathan W. <jw...@ju...>]

Hi Adrian

> > I don't have a problem with that if it is indeed more appropriate for this
> > to be a part of udev rather thanf ffado.  The only disadvantage I can see
> > for putting it in udev is that when new devices require revised udev
> > entries, a user has to do more than just install a new ffado package.
> 
> I tend to prefer shipping it in FFADO. It's more flexible, since
> updating udev can involve major changes to your entire system.

I'm happy with that.

> Anyway, if you like, I can propose inclusion of the file to our (Debian's)
> udev maintainer to get it upstream.

I really don't have a firm basis for deciding either way.  In your opinion
and experience do you think that it's worth doing this to get *something*
into the field?  If we ship this as part of ffado itself I would think that
there's no need to include it in udev - those who install ffado will get the
file, and those who don't won't need it anyway.  Having a version in udev
may ultimately cause confusion, since an update to udev could reverse an
addition made by a later version of ffado.

> I've updated the Debian udev rules and added the file to FFADO in r2127.
> As of r2128, it's now installed to /lib/udev/rules.d/.

Great, thanks for that.  It seems to me that having it as part of ffado is
the better option and will be more flexible.

Regards
  jonathan