| 1 |
On 02/08/13 05:48, Dale wrote: |
| 2 |
> Samuli Suominen wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> Huh? USE="firmware-loader" is optional and enabled by default in |
| 5 |
>> sys-fs/udev |
| 6 |
>> Futhermore predictable network interface names work as designed, not a |
| 7 |
>> single valid bug filed about them. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> Stop spreading FUD. |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> Looking forward to lastrite sys-fs/eudev just like |
| 12 |
>> sys-apps/module-init-tools already was removed as unnecessary later on. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> So your real agenda is to kill eudev? Maybe it is you that is spreading |
| 15 |
> FUD instead of others. Like others have said, udev was going to cause |
| 16 |
> issues, eudev has yet to cause any. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Yes, absolutely sys-fs/eudev should be punted from tree since it doesn't |
| 19 |
bring in anything useful, and it reintroduced old bugs from old version |
| 20 |
of udev, as well as adds confusing to users. |
| 21 |
And no, sys-fs/udev doesn't have issues, in fact, less than what |
| 22 |
sys-fs/eudev has. |
| 23 |
Like said earlier, the bugs assigned to udev-bugs@g.o apply also to |
| 24 |
sys-fs/eudev and they have even more in their github ticketing system. |
| 25 |
And sys-fs/udev maintainers have to constantly monitor sys-fs/eudev so |
| 26 |
it doesn't fall too much behind, which adds double work unnecessarily. |
| 27 |
They don't keep it up-to-date on their own without prodding. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Really, this is how it has went right from the start and the double work |
| 30 |
and user confusion needs to stop. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
- Samuli |
Archives