Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 239296 - sys-apps/usb_modeswitch-0.9.4 stabilisation
Summary: sys-apps/usb_modeswitch-0.9.4 stabilisation
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: New packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: High normal (vote)
Assignee: No maintainer - Look at https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Proxy_Maintainers if you want to take care of it
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: STABLEREQ
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2008-10-01 22:31 UTC by Stefan Behte (RETIRED)
Modified: 2010-02-11 23:30 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments
usb_modeswitch-0.9.5.ebuild (usb_modeswitch-0.9.5.ebuild,1.44 KB, text/plain)
2008-12-06 14:00 UTC, Stefan Behte (RETIRED)
Details
diff between 0.9.4 and 0.9.5 (diff,1.00 KB, text/plain)
2008-12-06 14:01 UTC, Stefan Behte (RETIRED)
Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Stefan Behte (RETIRED) gentoo-dev Security 2008-10-01 22:31:42 UTC
Hi, 
please stabilize sys-apps/usb_modeswitch, I'm using it regularly for about 6 months now (see #213973 - I used the software even before it was in the tree)  and had no problems at all.

Thanks!
Comment 1 Lutz Lehmann 2008-11-12 15:57:06 UTC
(In reply to comment #0)
> Hi, 
> please stabilize sys-apps/usb_modeswitch, I'm using it regularly for about 6
> months now (see #213973 - I used the software even before it was in the tree) 
> and had no problems at all.
> 
> Thanks!
> 

recent sys-fs/udev store rules in /etc/udev/rules.d

Don't know when it all started, but *if* if was 1.06, please bump to 0.94-r1 as follows:

--- usb_modeswitch-0.9.4.ebuild    2008-08-26 00:28:23.000000000 +0200
+++ usb_modeswitch-0.9.4-r1.ebuild      2008-11-12 16:39:40.000000000 +0100
@@ -26,11 +26,12 @@
        insinto /etc
        doins usb_modeswitch.conf
        if has_version '>=sys-fs/udev-0'; then
-               insinto /etc/udev
                if has_version '>=sys-fs/udev-106'; then
+                       insinto /etc/udev/rules.d
                        newins "${FILESDIR}"/91-usb_modeswitch.rules.udev-ge-106 \
                                91-usb_modeswitch.rules
                elif has_version '<sys-fs/udev-106'; then
+                       insinto /etc/udev
                        newins "${FILESDIR}"/91-usb_modeswitch.rules.udev-lt-106 \
                                91-usb_modeswitch.rules
                fi
Comment 2 Thomas Rausch 2008-12-02 12:54:51 UTC
The file "91-usb_modeswitch.rules" placed into directory "/etc/udev/". This is not correct. The right place is "/etc/udev/rules.d".
Comment 3 Stefan Behte (RETIRED) gentoo-dev Security 2008-12-06 13:59:28 UTC
http://www.reactivated.net/writing_udev_rules.html:
"When deciding how to name a device and which additional actions to perform, udev reads a series of rules files. These files are kept in the /etc/udev/rules.d directory, and they all must have the .rules suffix."

It seems that all udev ebuilds in tree use that path.
There is a new version that supports more devices; the new ebuild is for 0.9.5, contains the fix, and changes einfo a bit.
Comment 4 Stefan Behte (RETIRED) gentoo-dev Security 2008-12-06 14:00:33 UTC
Created attachment 174403 [details]
usb_modeswitch-0.9.5.ebuild
Comment 5 Stefan Behte (RETIRED) gentoo-dev Security 2008-12-06 14:01:04 UTC
Created attachment 174405 [details]
diff between 0.9.4 and 0.9.5
Comment 6 Denilson Sá Maia 2008-12-06 14:27:45 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> There is a new version that supports more devices;

Yes, true. 0.9.5 adds support for a lot of more devices, so I think it is a recommended update.

Also, the earliest udev version in portage is 114, so I think we can safely remove that udev version check in the ebuild.
Comment 7 Stefan Behte (RETIRED) gentoo-dev Security 2008-12-06 15:08:18 UTC
I also thought about that, but:
a) the check does not break anything
b) users that did not update yet (for whatever reason) wouldn't be pleased if we removed it
Comment 8 Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C) (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-01-10 14:09:13 UTC
*** Bug 254390 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 9 Wolfram Schlich (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2009-11-21 14:01:08 UTC
oops...