| 1 |
Michał Górny schrieb: |
| 2 |
>> In a follow-up, upstream wrote about how you should only run udev together |
| 3 |
>> with systemd, and if you don't want to do that (spelling as in original): |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> "we will not support the udev-on-netlink case anymore. I see three options: |
| 6 |
>> a) fork things, b) live with systemd, c) if hate systemd that much, but |
| 7 |
>> love udev so much, then implement an alternative userspace for kdbus to |
| 8 |
>> do initialiuzation/policy/activation." |
| 9 |
>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-May/019664.html |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> So it seems a bit more than only initialization is needed. |
| 12 |
> You're missing the third option which is a sane option, and jump |
| 13 |
> straight to pitchforks. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Are you serious? The quoted line directly above your comment shows |
| 16 |
clearly that I have read and understood the third option. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> If Lennart's single statement from 2014 is a reason to use eudev |
| 19 |
> instead of systemd-udevd, my statement from today is a more important |
| 20 |
> reason not to use eudev. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
With the exception that Lennart Poettering is the lead developer of |
| 23 |
systemd/udev, while such a thing cannot be said about you and eudev. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Best regards, |
| 27 |
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn |
Archives