| 1 |
On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Frank Peters <frank.peters@×××××××.net> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2014 12:20:29 -0600 |
| 3 |
> Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> > |
| 6 |
>> > I have never used udev/eudev/mdev or anything similar and, if I am allowed |
| 7 |
>> > to nave a choice, I never will. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> You will always have that choice, since the software is free. |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> That's not true anymore. My USB scanners will not operate unless udev |
| 13 |
> is able to create an entry within the /dev tree. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Fortunately, I was able to discover a work-around that does not require |
| 16 |
> udev, but the point is that freedom of choice is starting to disappear. |
| 17 |
> Udev will eventually be the *only* way to deal with hardware. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
While I understand your point these two comments contradict each |
| 20 |
other, or more accurately, the first was inaccurate in the sense that |
| 21 |
someone needed to create your /dev entry, either udev or you, it |
| 22 |
didn't matter. Once it was there your scanner worked, correct? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Again, I do understand the concern. Never having run systemd I have it |
| 25 |
also. However the more I read the more tame the concerns seem to be. |
| 26 |
They do, however, still exist... |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
- Mark |
Archives