Re: [gentoo-dev] Changing order of default virtual/udev provider

[Rich Freeman]

On 2/8/16, Patrick Lauer <patrick@g.o> wrote:
> The idea here is to change the order of the providers of virtual/udev.
> For existing installs this has zero impact.
> For stage3 this would mean that eudev is pulled in instead of udev.

Might I suggest a slightly different approach.  I don't really have a
strong preference on the order of providers in this virtual, though I
don't really care for a direction of promoting in-house tools over
standardized ones (genkernel is another one that comes to mind).
Gentoo's distinctiveness should come from being source-based and
offering choices, not from a large collection of internal forks (I
have nothing against people working on them, but they shouldn't be the
default experience).

However, I think we're actually missing the bigger issue here.  Why is
this virtual even in @system to begin with?  When I set up a chroot or
some kinds of containers I don't need udev, or sysvinit (or openssh -
but let's set that one aside for now).

We don't stick grub or genkernel or even gentoo-sources in our
stage3s.  Why stick (e)udev in there?

It seems like this should just be another step in the handbook - pick
your desired device manager.

Obviously if we produce a boot CD it will need a device manager (and
kernel and bootloader and network manager), and I don't care which one
it is.

This just seems more like the Gentoo way, and it completely sidesteps
all the controversy over defaults.  We're already working on fixing
the few remaining functions.sh references so that openrc can be
removed from the system set as well.

-- 
Rich