| 1 |
On Sun, Jul 18, 2004 at 03:18:38PM -0400, Dylan Carlson wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sunday 18 July 2004 2:10 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> > Well, that can't happen across the board until 2.6.x works on |
| 5 |
> > everything. OTOH, it'd be nice if we started suggesting udev (without |
| 6 |
> > that wretched tarball hack) for anyone running 2.6.x. Aside from one |
| 7 |
> > rather nasty 64bit-related b0rkage, udev's been doing very nicely. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Right. I didn't mean that as a question of 'where should we be Now', but |
| 10 |
> 'where do we want to be later'... it's probably a foregone conclusion |
| 11 |
> (with gregkh steering things) that udev is on its way, but perhaps that |
| 12 |
> leaves a question mark of where how we will support devfs when that |
| 13 |
> happens. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> That said, I don't know how many hacks exist in the package tree to add |
| 16 |
> udev support. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I don't know of any such "hacks" becides the tarball stuff. That will |
| 19 |
be necessary for a number of different devices over time until we |
| 20 |
finally fix up all of the kernel code. Actually I think we are pretty |
| 21 |
much done with all of the patches for this for a while now. If there |
| 22 |
are any missing places (other than the ones listed already in this |
| 23 |
thread), please let me know and I'll look into fixing it up. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
thanks, |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
greg k-h |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives