| 1 |
On 08/09/2012 12:20 PM, Luca Barbato wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 08/09/2012 10:57 AM, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 3 |
>> No. I meant to have 'GNU' tools with 'GNU' stripped. Isn't that what |
| 4 |
>> the whole discussion is about? Changing names of tools just for |
| 5 |
>> someone's liking? |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> No, we are discussing about an upstream merging two unrelated projects |
| 8 |
> assuring users that nothing would change for them. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> In a week they claimed that it was unsupported, then backpedaled, then |
| 11 |
> they changed its paths. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
(picked near random mail from the thread) |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
sep. /usr was not supported prior to renaming and $udevdir has been |
| 16 |
dynamic from the udev.pc pkg-config file for long as I can remember |
| 17 |
therefore the renaming and path change is merely cosmetics to which |
| 18 |
*users* don't need to pay attention to |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
so yeah, this whole thread is just that, trying to introduce regression |
| 21 |
due to personal preference |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
187-r3 does it right and after fixing the few hardcoded paths in tree, |
| 24 |
we can drop the 2 patches and backwards compability |
| 25 |
i'm nearly done with pushing fixes to drop the few known hardcoded paths |
| 26 |
we have in tree, and about to ask for a tinderbox run to catch the rest |
| 27 |
(which can take it's time, the patches are there, as mentioned) |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
so help is welcome with the migration[1], see eg. usb_modeswitch, |
| 30 |
libmtp, udisks:0, udisks:2 (configure.ac), etc. for example |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
[1] this is about using non-hardcoded paths and respecting udev.pc set |
| 33 |
udevdir=, not really about migrating, so even if the move wasn't |
| 34 |
happening, these have always been "bugs" of sort |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
- Samuli |
Archives