| 1 |
On Sun, Aug 09, 2020 at 06:40:07PM +0200, Thomas Deutschmann wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 2020-08-08 20:51, William Hubbs wrote: |
| 3 |
> > What do people think? |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> Like others already asked: What's the reason for this? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Like others have said on the thread, the reason for the switch away |
| 8 |
from udev in the past was mostly fear driven instead of fact driven. As |
| 9 |
already said, if the udev developers were going to make udev unusable |
| 10 |
without systemd they would have by now. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> What do you expect from this change? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I expect Gentoo to use, by default, what most of the Linux community |
| 15 |
uses for device management. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> Is there a problem when new Gentoo installations will use EUDEV by |
| 18 |
> default? Or is there a benefit if new installations would use sys-fs/udev? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Please look back at the history of why we switched away from udev. It |
| 21 |
was not technical. Udev did not cause any wide scale distro breakages. |
| 22 |
It was because some folks were very loud about a possible systemd |
| 23 |
consppiracy around making udev not work without systemd. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Years later, this has not happened, so to be honest, I think it is time |
| 26 |
to admit that we , as a council and distro, over reacted and undo that |
| 27 |
over reaction. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Notice again that I'm not saying we need to lastrites eudev. There are |
| 30 |
cases that have developed for it (mainly non-glibc systems), but I am |
| 31 |
saying I see no justification at this point for it being the default |
| 32 |
distro wide. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
William |
Archives