We can consider the device name change for edgy, I suspect the only reason we don't name them that is that nobody else did at the time we froze our udev rules.
I'm against the idea of a group just for one device node, a "firewire" group could be added and all *1394 devices placed into that though; that'd fit our classful groupings
We can consider the device name change for edgy, I suspect the only reason we don't name them that is that nobody else did at the time we froze our udev rules.
I'm against the idea of a group just for one device node, a "firewire" group could be added and all *1394 devices placed into that though; that'd fit our classful groupings