| 1 |
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Are you aware how much additional code and maintenance does keeping two |
| 3 |
> hacked build systems introduce? One of things I don't want to do is |
| 4 |
> keeping the list of *all other* systemd targets up-to-date, |
| 5 |
> and installing them all by hand. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I'd assumed that Thomas was representing some lack of consensus among |
| 8 |
the systemd team. If the systemd team really is aligned with wanting |
| 9 |
to install udev within their build then the virtual makes sense to me. |
| 10 |
It would have no impact on other packages and would make things |
| 11 |
easier for systemd. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
That said, we need to keep an eye on any continuing drift between udev |
| 14 |
and our needs. If there is a fork and one does the /usr move then we |
| 15 |
need to figure out some way of handling that. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Just seems like part of the continuing "Androidification" of Linux. |
| 18 |
It really is the year of the linux desktop (or phone), but linux only |
| 19 |
in the sense of the kernel that is being run. Between the /usr move, |
| 20 |
systemd, upstart, wayland, unity, GnomeOS, udev, and who knows what is |
| 21 |
next, it seems like we're going to end up with 20 medium-sized distros |
| 22 |
and no piece of code runs reliably on more than one or two of them. |
| 23 |
Linux will end up having less in common with itself than it currently |
| 24 |
has in common with Solaris. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Rich |
Archives