Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Walter Dnes <waltdnes@××××××××.org>
To: Gentoo Users List <gentoo-user@l.g.o>
Subject: [gentoo-user] busybox/mdev as a possible alternative to udev?
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 02:21:32
Message-Id: 20110916022033.GA23818@waltdnes.org
1 There's another thread for complaining about the brokenness of the
2 proposed udev implementation. This one is for doing something about it.
3 After reading the udev-complaints thread, I joined the busybox list, and
4 asked if busybox's simple mdev feature could replace udev. See thread
5 http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.busybox/35018
6
7 Apparently it can be done for "simple" systems, but there may be
8 problems for some of the more complex setups. Then again, these more
9 complex systems are the ones that would probably require /usr on the
10 same partition as /, in the first place (or else initramfs). See
11 message http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.busybox/35028 for details.
12 In addition to the "mdev" flag, I would recommend the "static" flag on
13 principle, especially if /usr is a separate partition.
14
15 If we ever do get this working on a large scale, we may need to ask
16 the Gentoo developers for a "virtual/udev" ebuild, which could be
17 satisfied by busybox with the "mdev" flag, just like "virtual/mta" can
18 be satisfied by ssmtp with the "mta" flag. This would allow people to
19 choose whether they want udev or mdev.
20
21 We should keep the discussion on this mailing list. Asking once if
22 it's possible is one thing. Flooding the busybox list with Gentoo-
23 specific questions would probably not be appreciated.
24
25 --
26 Walter Dnes <waltdnes@××××××××.org>

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] busybox/mdev as a possible alternative to udev? Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com>