| 1 |
On 01/08/13 19:46, Pacho Ramos wrote: |
| 2 |
> El jue, 01-08-2013 a las 18:11 +0200, Luca Barbato escribió: |
| 3 |
>> On 01/08/13 17:36, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> So esystemd and ekmod now? |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> You know my stance on systemd, for me it is a jumble of bad and |
| 7 |
>> interesting ideas not so soundly implemented, I do not have much time or |
| 8 |
>> will to play with that thing. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> kmod on the other hand had a pressing issue and getting it fixed-ish |
| 11 |
>> took about an evening while having Federico see around it. |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> lu |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> But, what are the advantages of putting a lot of effort in keeping |
| 17 |
> static libs for udev? |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
A lot of effort means not using random-clashing-names, not keeping |
| 20 |
functions around just because. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> Looks like nothing really need them, and even |
| 23 |
> Debian (that doesn't use systemd by default) drops them |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Robbat said he wants to keep the stuff working, thus I lent him an hand |
| 26 |
while introducing a friend to a small codebase with a good number of |
| 27 |
practices I consider faulty but sort of easy to fix. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
lu |
Archives