1 |
On 2/9/16 6:59 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
2 |
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 12:27 AM, Anthony G. Basile <blueness@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
>> On 2/8/16 10:09 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
4 |
>>> How many of those 14 distros have more than 14 users? |
5 |
>> |
6 |
>> gentoo is very unpopular as a distro. however, it excels as a meta |
7 |
>> distro. if you marginalize its special features, you take away all its |
8 |
>> charm. |
9 |
> |
10 |
> Gentoo's special feature is that it is source-based, not that it uses |
11 |
> a different udev implementation from everybody else by default. |
12 |
|
13 |
that's not what i said. |
14 |
|
15 |
> |
16 |
>>> |
17 |
>>> Look, I get it, some people don't like systemd. That's fine. |
18 |
>>> However, you have to realize at this point that a non-systemd |
19 |
>>> configuration is anything but mainstream. |
20 |
>> |
21 |
>> neither is a system based on musl or uclibc, but if you need an embedded |
22 |
>> system, then these are "mainstream". |
23 |
> |
24 |
> Sure, but they're also not defaults. |
25 |
|
26 |
this is circular argumentation. they are not default where they are not |
27 |
default. and they are where they are. |
28 |
|
29 |
you simply want to privilege a certain set of targeted systems |
30 |
(desktop/server) over another set (embedded). |
31 |
|
32 |
> |
33 |
>> |
34 |
>> anyhow, the argument in the subject is the order of udev and eudev in |
35 |
>> the virtual, not systemd vs eudev. |
36 |
> |
37 |
> And that is about defaults. |
38 |
|
39 |
nope. currently stages come with sys-fs/udev as default. |
40 |
|
41 |
> |
42 |
>> |
43 |
>> There will always be a |
44 |
>>> "poppyseed linux" whose purpose in life seems to be to preserve linux |
45 |
>>> without sysfs or some other obscure practice. |
46 |
>> |
47 |
>> no, more like special uses. you're framing the issue based on your |
48 |
>> notion of "mainstream" |
49 |
> |
50 |
> My notion of mainstream, and Fedora's, and Debian's, and RHEL's, and Arch's... |
51 |
|
52 |
correct, that is your notion. in the grand scheme of things windows is |
53 |
mainstream and fedora, debian, etc are just marginal. |
54 |
|
55 |
you're missing the point that the style of argumentation you're taking |
56 |
is one of a particular view that you privilege. |
57 |
|
58 |
> |
59 |
>>> |
60 |
>>>> |
61 |
>>>> it needs to be in the new stage4s to make a bootable system. imo a |
62 |
>>>> stage4 should be bootable modulo a kernel. |
63 |
>>>> |
64 |
>>> |
65 |
>>> Sure, a stage4 based on systemd makes a lot of sense. |
66 |
>> |
67 |
>> not for embedded and the things i work on. these have users. |
68 |
>> |
69 |
> |
70 |
> Systemd makes plenty of sense for many embedded solutions. For the |
71 |
> kinds of solutions where it doesn't make sense, I'm not sure that |
72 |
> linux makes sense. |
73 |
|
74 |
like? embedded os has avoided systemd like the plague. they opt for |
75 |
busybox mdev. |
76 |
|
77 |
> |
78 |
> But, even if you accept that eudev makes more sense for some embedded |
79 |
> solutions, we're taking about the default here, not the default for |
80 |
> the embedded profile (which doesn't actually exist, though with |
81 |
> mix-ins it might some day). |
82 |
> |
83 |
>>> |
84 |
>>> I think that offering an eudev-based distro as a default just doesn't |
85 |
>>> make sense in 2016. |
86 |
>> |
87 |
>> because you have a limited sense of usefulness |
88 |
> |
89 |
> It doesn't make sense as a default in the context of the situations |
90 |
> where our default profile is intended. Maybe you could convince |
91 |
> somebody that it makes sense as a choice for a very specialized use |
92 |
> case, but in that use case you're probably going to have a list of USE |
93 |
> flags a mile long and be overriding numerous default providers. eudev |
94 |
> would just be one more in that case. |
95 |
> |
96 |
>> |
97 |
>>> 2. People get offended when others express a different preference. |
98 |
>> |
99 |
>> all the vitriolic attacks i get about eudev come from the gentoo |
100 |
>> community. outside of this community i get praise. |
101 |
> |
102 |
> Gentoo is a community focused on providing a source-based distro where |
103 |
> you have choices. I doubt anybody in the Gentoo community is bothered |
104 |
> about your offering another choice. |
105 |
|
106 |
being a from source distro means a lot more than you give it ... see below. |
107 |
|
108 |
> |
109 |
> The controversy comes in when you want to make it a default, and start |
110 |
> arguing that it is somehow better than the solution everybody else is |
111 |
> using. |
112 |
|
113 |
i'm not arguing for the default. i'm saying that your argumentation has |
114 |
flaws. |
115 |
|
116 |
> |
117 |
> Outside of Gentoo people either aren't concerned at all with eudev (it |
118 |
> probably isn't even in their distro repositories), or they're a tiny |
119 |
> distro whose main purpose in life seems to be to avoid installing |
120 |
> systemd. Of course you're going to get praise from them. |
121 |
|
122 |
the assumption here is that Gentoo is a single distribution where its |
123 |
from source nature makes it a meta distribution. so you create a false |
124 |
dichotomy between gentoo and "tiney distros whose main purpose" Many of |
125 |
those "tiny distros" are gentoo because gentoo is a set covering many |
126 |
derivatives. |
127 |
|
128 |
the reason i'm engaging in this is not because of the default. the |
129 |
reason i'm engaging in this dialogue is because of the repeated |
130 |
reduction in vision as to what "from source" means. |
131 |
|
132 |
> |
133 |
> I've always supported having eudev hosted by Gentoo. I just don't |
134 |
> support it being the default udev provider. |
135 |
> |
136 |
|
137 |
|
138 |
-- |
139 |
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. |
140 |
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] |
141 |
E-Mail : blueness@g.o |
142 |
GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA |
143 |
GnuPG ID : F52D4BBA |