Hi, I have recently noticed that udev is erroring as it can't find a "fuse" group. I have noticed when you have sys-fs/udev-124 installed we have this in this file: # cat /etc/udev/rules.d/99-fuse.rules KERNEL=="fuse", MODE="0666" and in sys-fs/udev-124-r1 we have this: # cat /etc/udev/rules.d/99-fuse.rules KERNEL=="fuse", NAME="%k", MODE="0660",OWNER="root",GROUP="fuse" On my systems it doesn't seem to add in a "fuse" group and it errors because of this when booting. Adding a fuse group by hand fixes the errors. Perhaps this can be included into the next release? Rich Reproducible: Always
Hi, It seems that the 99-fuse.rules file has changed between releases and now reverted back to the older version. On the system that has the group error I have this: # equery belongs /etc/udev/rules.d/99-fuse.rules [ Searching for file(s) /etc/udev/rules.d/99-fuse.rules in *... ] sys-fs/fuse-2.7.4-r1 (/etc/udev/rules.d/99-fuse.rules) But on another system that has sys-fs/fuse-2.7.4-r2 I have this: # equery belongs /etc/udev/rules.d/99-fuse.rules [ Searching for file(s) /etc/udev/rules.d/99-fuse.rules in *... ] sys-fs/fuse-2.7.4 (/etc/udev/rules.d/99-fuse.rules) It seems that one one system I missed installing the "r1" release and went straight from 2.7.4 to 2.7.4-r2 and things are ok as the 99-fuse.rules file hasn't been updated. However, if you go from 2.7.4 to 2.7.4-r1 to 2.7.4-r2 you get the extra info in the 99-fuse.rules file. Which 99-fuse.rules file should I have? the one with the fuse group listed or the one without? Thanks, Rich
Assigning this bug to sys-fs/fuse maintainers, as fuse does install its rules file on its own. It has nothing todo with which udev version is used. Second point: Why is the file called 99-fuse.rules. Is it important that it is last? Why not just call it 40-fuse.rules as most other packages do. It could also be installed to /lib/udev/rules.d/ as it is not supposed to be changed by users, but sadly I think udev-124-r2 that is stable, does not support it.
(In reply to comment #2) > Assigning this bug to sys-fs/fuse maintainers, as fuse does install its rules > file on its own. It has nothing todo with which udev version is used. Mis-fire. %% epkginfo sys-fs/fuse Package: sys-fs/fuse Herd: kernel-misc Maintainer: genstef@gentoo.org Location: /usr/portage/sys-fs/fuse
99-fuse.rules is part of sys-fs/fuse, not sys-fs/udev and indeed: $ grep fuse * 50-udev-default.rules:KERNEL=="fuse", ACTION=="add", MODE="0666", OPTIONS+="static_node=fuse" 99-fuse.rules:KERNEL=="fuse", MODE="0666" nothing about group "fuse" there, so I presume this has been fixed at some point without anyone noticing? closing then
(looked at current stable, udev-197-r3, nothing older should be tested for bugs)
