Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

improve udev rules "handling" #366

Closed
daringer opened this issue Apr 6, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed

improve udev rules "handling" #366

daringer opened this issue Apr 6, 2023 · 2 comments
Labels
good first issue Good for newcomers UI

Comments

@daringer
Copy link
Collaborator

daringer commented Apr 6, 2023

We should be better with recognizing not existing udev rules, I see the following options to be investigated:

  • automatically search for the actual udev-rules file and inform the user that it is not existing
  • ship udev-rules files together with pynitrokey (installation might often not be useful, but nitropy utils install-udev-rules might be a thing?
  • on failed operations that most likely need udev-rules be more explicit with the error message
  • include the udev-rules file so that package maintainers can actually build packages that include these

we could easily have multiple udev-rules-files installed on a system without them interfering, right? Even if they handle the same devices? (e.g., one from nitrokey-app, one from pynitrokey)

@szszszsz
Copy link
Member

szszszsz commented Apr 7, 2023

Partly a duplicate of #197.
The minimum is downloading the udev rules file to the CWD and list to user what needs to be executed.
Automatically installing to the system directory is not seen welcomed AFAIK.

Udev rules contain instructions to stop processing once the rule match, so multiple of them should not conflict. The only downside is to extend the processing time for other devices, having lower priority than this particular file.


Docs: https://docs.nitrokey.com/nitrokey3/linux/firmware-update

@daringer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

daringer commented Sep 5, 2023

This is a duplicate of: #386 which should be used to track this
Same applies to #197

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
good first issue Good for newcomers UI
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants