1 |
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 11:25:11PM +0200, Joost Roeleveld wrote |
2 |
> On Thursday, September 15, 2011 01:43:17 PM Canek Pel??ez Vald??s wrote: |
3 |
> > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s <caneko@×××××.com> |
4 |
> wrote: |
5 |
> > (This mail is to keep the guys un -user in the loop about -devel). |
6 |
> > |
7 |
> > OK, so Joost posted his proposal to -dev: |
8 |
> |
9 |
> <snipped brief discussion on gentoo-dev> |
10 |
> |
11 |
> The thread on gentoo-dev is not yet finished and I intend to try to get some |
12 |
> more information. As I mentioned in my other email. |
13 |
|
14 |
I've asked on the busybox list, and one of the people there says he |
15 |
does have a chrooted Gentoo running with mdev (a busybox tool) replacing |
16 |
udev. There were various other changes he had to make to get it |
17 |
working, but it obviously can be done. He's busy for the next couple of |
18 |
weeks, but has offered (offline) to work on generalizing it to work in |
19 |
more general cases. Apparently, the mdev code is a small part of |
20 |
busybox, so he figures it would be simplest to copy the code out of |
21 |
busybox, and make a standalone mdev. The busybox mdev doesn't have all |
22 |
the features of udev, and busybox's developers will obviously want to |
23 |
keep their code lean-and-mean. That's why a standalone mdev seems to be |
24 |
the way to go. |
25 |
|
26 |
-- |
27 |
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@××××××××.org> |