1 |
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014 12:20:29 -0600 |
2 |
Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@×××××.com> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> > |
5 |
> > I have never used udev/eudev/mdev or anything similar and, if I am allowed |
6 |
> > to nave a choice, I never will. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> You will always have that choice, since the software is free. |
9 |
> |
10 |
|
11 |
That's not true anymore. My USB scanners will not operate unless udev |
12 |
is able to create an entry within the /dev tree. |
13 |
|
14 |
Fortunately, I was able to discover a work-around that does not require |
15 |
udev, but the point is that freedom of choice is starting to disappear. |
16 |
Udev will eventually be the *only* way to deal with hardware. |
17 |
|
18 |
|
19 |
> |
20 |
> If you want to create a /dev tree for a computer that never gets new |
21 |
> hardware connected via USB, bluetooth, or another bus, yeah, it's |
22 |
> pretty trivial. |
23 |
> |
24 |
> Too bad that kind of computer is going the way of the dodo. |
25 |
> |
26 |
|
27 |
Also not true. We are, to be sure, experiencing explosive growth in |
28 |
mobile computing but there is still a substantial number of traditional |
29 |
desktop machines in operation for which udev is still quite unnecessary. |
30 |
|
31 |
But, to continue your point, we can also claim that hardware itself |
32 |
is going the way of the dodo. The way of the future is to have Linux, |
33 |
and all other operating systems, existing on top of layers of virtualization |
34 |
without the need for specific hardware concerns at all. |
35 |
|
36 |
This possibility for total virtualization would still not be desirable |
37 |
for all. |
38 |
|
39 |
> |
40 |
> The alternatives will be always available, of course. |
41 |
> |
42 |
|
43 |
I hope that you are right, but when I see distributions like "Linux |
44 |
From Scratch," which purport to give the user total understanding |
45 |
and control of his system, not including alternatives to udev I begin |
46 |
to have serious doubts. |
47 |
|
48 |
Frank Peters |