| 1 |
On 02/14/2016 09:23 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 14 Feb 2016 11:41, Brian Dolbec wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 11:00:30 -0500 Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote: |
| 5 |
>>>> If, for any reason, eudev should be abandoned - we can just change |
| 6 |
>>>> the virtual back. One-line change. |
| 7 |
>>> Which is precisely the corresponding argument for not switching the |
| 8 |
>>> default to eudev in the first place. |
| 9 |
>> OH, my, this is looking more like you are being paid by systemd peeps... |
| 10 |
> honestly ? cut the crap man. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
>> You are just refusing to acknowledge these simple facts. |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> systemd.................: irrelevant to this decision |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
>> standalone systemd-udev.: Vehemently unsupported, support for its |
| 17 |
>> capability to exist is planned to be punted |
| 18 |
>> in the future. |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
>> eudev...................: fully functional, actively developed, |
| 21 |
>> and fully supported, mature project, been |
| 22 |
>> around for years. |
| 23 |
> udev: it's the default in every major distro that everyone tests and |
| 24 |
> develops against. |
| 25 |
Not the standalone config we're using, so if you remove all |
| 26 |
systemd-using distros which are irrelevant to this discussion you end up |
| 27 |
with gentoo, and ~15 distros that use eudev. And of course other |
| 28 |
irrelevant weirdos that use mdev, vdev etc. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> eudev: no one of any relevance outside of Gentoo runs it. |
| 31 |
No one runs udev either. So that's a non-argument |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
So given the context of this discussion, and your ignorant contribution |
| 35 |
... maybe you should cut the crap, man. Being a bit more polite wouldn't |
| 36 |
be wrong either. |
Archives