| 1 |
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 9:42 PM Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:51:17 -0500 Ben Kohler wrote: |
| 4 |
> > Hello, |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > I'd like to propose adding USE=udev to our linux profiles (in |
| 7 |
> > profiles/default/linux/make.defaults probably). This flag is already |
| 8 |
> > enabled on desktop profiles but it also affects quite a few packages |
| 9 |
> > used on non-desktop linux systems. |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> I have server setups with udev disabled for most packages. So udev |
| 13 |
> enabled by default will create maintenance problems. While I'm |
| 14 |
> perfectly fine with udev enabled by default on desktops, it should |
| 15 |
> not be forced on minimalistic setups like servers or containers. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
80% of the servers on the planet are running a linux distro, and 99% |
| 18 |
of those are probably running udev. Gentoo is probably the only |
| 19 |
distro where making udev the (trivially disabled) default is even |
| 20 |
remotely controversial. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Maybe we need some kind of ultra-minimal profile for people who really |
| 23 |
don't want anything installed if they didn't put it there. It seems |
| 24 |
odd to make that sort of configuration our "base" as it really isn't a |
| 25 |
normal configuration by any standard. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
There is nothing wrong with people who want to start with a minimal |
| 28 |
profile. I just don't think it makes a lot of sense to have that as a |
| 29 |
default starting point. There is no reason that "base" needs to be a |
| 30 |
subset of all the other profiles. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
If for some reason we don't go with this, perhaps it would at least |
| 33 |
make sense to have a server profile that enables it by default and |
| 34 |
make base something that normal users are discouraged from using. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
Rich |
Archives