The current 99-openocd.rules uses "GROUP=plugdev" which is erroneous, please : sed 's/MODE="664", GROUP="plugdev"/TAG+="uaccess"/' mv 99-openocd.rules 69-openocd.rules Thanks
Created attachment 974929 [details] patch for openocd.spec
the rule number change is required, not a gag :] 'plugdev' may have worked done anywhere, but uaccess needs to be done before 73-seat-late.rules thank you for the patch
This package has changed ownership in the Fedora Package Database. Reassigning to the new owner of this component.
I've created custom udev rules for this, but it would be nice to get the packaged ones fixed.
submitted for review - http://openocd.zylin.com/#/c/2804/
Please fix in Fedora, I am seeing now the following error in the journal (it's highlighted in red color): srp 26 16:19:43 yarda systemd-udevd[753]: starting version 219 srp 26 16:19:43 yarda systemd-udevd[753]: specified group 'plugdev' unknown
*** Bug 1257283 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 1270106 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
This message is a reminder that Fedora 21 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 21. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '21'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version. Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not able to fix it before Fedora 21 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete.
problem seems be more complicated, as openocd is not the only one package, which keeps own udev rules for ftdi devices. at least 2 other packages are using plugdev for same vendor:product - flashrom, libsigrok
Right, and I opened similar bug 1270102 for sigrok; I encourage everyone to apply this simple fix. Plugdev simply is imcompatible with Fedora.
(In reply to Przemek Klosowski from comment #11) > Right, and I opened similar bug 1270102 for sigrok; I encourage everyone to > apply this simple fix. Plugdev simply is imcompatible with Fedora. problem is that libftdi, flashrom, libsigrok and opencd have overlapping entries for same ftdi partnumbers
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 24 development cycle. Changing version to '24'. More information and reason for this action is here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Program_Management/HouseKeeping/Fedora24#Rawhide_Rebase
This bug is also present on Fedora 23. Once openocd is installed USB serial devices get the wrong permissions. _Without_ openocd installed: $ ls -l /dev/ttyUSB0 crw-rw----. 1 root dialout 188, 0 Apr 24 10:56 /dev/ttyUSB0 _With_ openocd installed: $ ls -l /dev/ttyUSB0 crw-rw-r--. 1 root root 188, 0 Apr 24 10:50 /dev/ttyUSB0 The initially provided fix works fine. After running: $ sudo sed -i 's/MODE="664", GROUP="plugdev"/TAG+="uaccess"/' /usr/lib/udev/rules.d/99-openocd.rules $ sudo udevadm control --reload Devices do get the correct permissions. Any chance of giving this bug a higher priority? (I do realise that everyone wants their pet bug fixed first, but here the solution is already provided.) Thanks for all the hard work
Re. comment 12, sigrok has this bug fixed, and libftdi uses uaccess so I think also has this fixed, so it's just flashrom that still uses plugdev. I opened a bug against flashrom ( https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1330205 ) The sigrok bug has been fixed in January ( https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1270102 ) with no fallout, so I think it's OK to apply it in openocd, without waiting for flashrom.
I will push a fixed version of openocd to the update system soon. Would you mind testing it and reply to the bug report or giving positiv karma. Thank you for your hard work and the patients...
openocd-0.9.0-4.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-dad992a5cd
openocd-0.9.0-4.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-418faaba64
openocd-0.9.0-4.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-dad992a5cd
openocd-0.9.0-4.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-418faaba64
openocd-0.9.0-4.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
openocd-0.9.0-4.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.