maintainability hell: hal+xorg

eldragon · 2009-06-04 13:24:00

ok, here comes a small worry ive got.

now that xorg is letting hal decide what and how to configure hardware, there are different places where config files lie..

the default options go to /usr/share/hal/fdi/policy while the user modified options go to /etc/hal/fdi/policy

this is all nice and dandy, but i dont see how to maintain this in a proper way...

for example, if there was a hal update that modified default fdi files, and we already created our custom file in etc (usually means copying the default option and adding what we need). when hal updates, those defaults wont be reflected in our modified fdi file, and thus, not taken into account.

my question is: am i missing something out? why hasnt this question been asked before? or is it a non-issue ?

this is the biggest problem with fdi files i can think of (not to mention the difficulty for humans to generate a working one without copy/pasting)

Mr.Elendig · 2009-06-04 13:31:14

If you already got a hal rule that works, why change it?

Also, you don't _have_ to use hotplugging in the first place if you don't need the features it provides.

eldragon · 2009-06-04 13:41:50

Mr.Elendig wrote:

If you already got a hal rule that works, why change it?
Also, you don't _have_ to use hotplugging in the first place if you don't need the features it provides.

this is besides the point... when there is a hal update, dont you do it? its natural. hal comes with many fdi files ready to detect default hardware, but if you set up your custom fdi overriding the default one, once the default one is updated, this is not reflected on your custom fdi. might be desirable, or not. but you definately dont get the chance to decide, since pacman cannot know about the existance of your custom file. using custom fdi files = making undocumented changes to your system.

im just pointing out a small design flaw which goes against the KISS principle. disabling hotplugging does not fix the problem, it hides it, and who said i dont like/need hotplugging?

Mr.Elendig · 2009-06-04 13:53:25

Keep your custom rule slim, and only set things like layout and model and so on, and that isn't really an issue.

tomk · 2009-06-04 14:02:37

Ask the xorg and/or hal devs about this - I'm pretty sure they don't read this forum.

eldragon · 2009-06-04 14:23:10

tomk wrote:

Ask the xorg and/or hal devs about this - I'm pretty sure they don't read this forum.

where? for obvious reasons i dont belong to their dev mailing lists.

tomk · 2009-06-04 14:32:05

Where is easily found, if you are sufficiently interested. My point is that this is an upstream decision, so it would be best to ask the people who made that decision. It's possible that this thread could generate useful discussion about how users intend to handle it, but that's not what you asked.

wonder · 2009-06-04 14:40:25

i really don't understand why you feel that you need to look for upstream default settings, since your custom settings are working very well.
btw. did you submit your custom settings for your device to hal-info team?

Last edited by wonder (2009-06-04 14:41:00)

Arch Linux

#1 2009-06-04 13:24:00

maintainability hell: hal+xorg

#2 2009-06-04 13:31:14

Re: maintainability hell: hal+xorg

#3 2009-06-04 13:41:50

Re: maintainability hell: hal+xorg

#4 2009-06-04 13:53:25

Re: maintainability hell: hal+xorg

#5 2009-06-04 14:02:37

Re: maintainability hell: hal+xorg

#6 2009-06-04 14:23:10

Re: maintainability hell: hal+xorg

#7 2009-06-04 14:32:05

Re: maintainability hell: hal+xorg

#8 2009-06-04 14:40:25

Re: maintainability hell: hal+xorg

Board footer