Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Greg KH <gregkh@g.o>
To: Richard Yao <ryao@g.o>
Cc: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] udev-ng? (Was: Summary Council meeting Tuesday 13 November 2012)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 04:19:17
Message-Id: 20121118041919.GA2920@kroah.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] udev-ng? (Was: Summary Council meeting Tuesday 13 November 2012) by Richard Yao
1 On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 11:02:00PM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
2 > On 11/17/2012 10:29 PM, Greg KH wrote:
3 > > I see an "entertaining" fork of udev on github at the moment (-ng,
4 > > really? What happens when someone wants to fork that, -ng-ng? Be a bit
5 > > more original in your naming please, good thing I never trademarked
6 > > "udev" all those years ago, maybe I still should...)
7 >
8 > That was a placeholder name. If you checked before you sent your email,
9 > you would see that we had settled on eudev.
10
11 The name change still doesn't make it any less "entertaining" :)
12
13 What does the "e" stand for?
14
15 > > But, along those lines, what is the goal of the fork? What are you
16 > > trying to attempt to do with a fork of udev that could not be
17 > > accomplished by:
18 > > - getting patches approved upstream
19 > > or:
20 > > - keeping a simple set of patches outside of the upstream tree and
21 > > applying them to each release
22 >
23 > The goal is to replace systemd as upstream for Gentoo Linux, its
24 > derivatives and any distribution not related to RedHat.
25
26 Wait, really? You want to replace systemd? Then why are you starting
27 at udev and not systemd?
28
29 What is wrong with systemd that it requires a fork? All other distros
30 seem to be participating in the development process of systemd quite
31 well, what is keeping Gentoo developers from also doing the same?
32
33 What are your goals, specifically, in detail.
34
35 > > I understand the bizarre need of some people to want to build the udev
36 > > binary without the build-time dependencies that systemd requires, but
37 > > surely that is a set of simple Makefile patches, right? And is
38 > > something that small really worth ripping tons of code out of a working
39 > > udev, causing major regressions on people's boxes (and yes, it is a
40 > > regression to slow my boot time down and cause hundreds of more
41 > > processes to be spawned before booting is finished.)
42 >
43 > See the following:
44 >
45 > https://github.com/gentoo/eudev/issues/3
46
47 You moved from an explicit to an implicit dependency. It's not
48 inspiring any sense of confidence from me that there is an understanding
49 of how things work here.
50
51 Seriously, the codebase you are working with isn't that large, or
52 complex, at all. To go rip stuff out, only to want to add it back in
53 later, wastes time, causes bugs, and goes against _any_ software
54 methodology that I know of.
55
56 confused,
57
58 greg k-h

Replies