| 1 |
Michał Górny schrieb: |
| 2 |
>> systemd and udev share the same codebase. You can no longer build udev |
| 3 |
>> without systemd. udev is only a sub-project of systemd now, hence the |
| 4 |
>> name "systemd-udevd". |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Of course, sure. But since you seem not to be able to understand |
| 7 |
> basics: this *does not* mean Lennart is the only person having |
| 8 |
> influence on how udev progresses. Sharing the same repository |
| 9 |
> and utility libraries is not the same as being the same thing. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Ok, apparently I am too dense to understand that the someone who is the lead |
| 12 |
developer and visionary of a project naturally has the same say as someone |
| 13 |
who is only bickering from the sidelines. Maybe if you had pointed out a |
| 14 |
systemd developer who disagreed with Lennart's words I could have seen the |
| 15 |
light earlier. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Also I am obviously unable to understand that when the kernel folks |
| 18 |
complained about the "new maintainers" of udev breaking things, they would of |
| 19 |
course never suspect that these "new maintainers" have anything to do with |
| 20 |
systemd at all. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1368617 |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Seriously. You gave good reasons why udev should remain the default over |
| 25 |
eudev, I acknowledged as much already. But do not continue the path of |
| 26 |
labelling your opponents as stupid and their arguments as FUD, because this |
| 27 |
is clearly not the case. It really doesn't help your argument, it just makes |
| 28 |
you look bad. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Best regards, |
| 33 |
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn |
Archives