Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Walter Dnes <waltdnes@××××××××.org>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev (viable) alternatives ?
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 17:08:24
Message-Id: 20141113170803.GA13450@waltdnes.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev (viable) alternatives ? by Rich Freeman
1 On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 07:18:30AM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote
2 > On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 12:20 AM, Walter Dnes <waltdnes@××××××××.org> wrote:
3 > >
4 > > What worries me is that Lennart has been able to get modifications
5 > > done to the kernel, e.g. kdbus. I know this'll sound paranoid, but how
6 > > long before he pushes a patch that requires systemd to run the linux
7 > > kernel?
8 >
9 > Apologies if this comes across a bit agro, but:
10 >
11 > 1. kdbus isn't in the kernel (though that seems likely to happen at some point)
12 > 2. it does sound paranoid
13 > 3. if he pushes a patch that requires systemd I'd be shocked if Linus merged it
14 >
15 > Can you find one example of any situation where the linux kernel has
16 > ever required any specific implementation of anything in userspace as
17 > a matter of policy in its 23 year history? I'm sure you could find
18 > some examples of cases where there just happened to be one de-facto
19 > implementation of something, but even that might be tough with all the
20 > diversity in the linux world.
21
22 It might not be an official official requirement, but if the upstream
23 gets rolled into systemd, then we depend on the "goodwill" of systemd
24 devs not to go and break anybody else's userspace implementation.
25 Lennart and "goodwill" do not belong in the same sentence. How's
26 systemd-shim working out for Debian??? I'm old enough to remember the
27 OS/2-versus-Windows wars. At one point, IBM had Windows 3.1 running
28 inside of OS/2. Then Microsoft issued "a minor update" (Windows 3.11)
29 and it no longer ran inside OS/2. It took a while for IBM to get
30 Windows 3.11 running inside OS/2. That's the kind of hostility that
31 non-Lennart userspace software faces.
32
33 > Linus himself has articulated some of the reasons why kdbus is likely
34 > to get merged. It fills in a gap in Linux as compared to many
35 > competing operating systems, and it is logical to implement at the
36 > kernel level. That is generally the criteria for getting stuff into
37 > the kernel, and is basically good software design. The linux kernel
38 > is all about stable userspace ABIs - if there is only one
39 > implementation of something it is probably because nobody was bothered
40 > enough to write another.
41
42 We Gentoo folks got our wakeup call ( literally
43 http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-May/019657.html )
44 from the guy who signs himself as "Lennart Poettering, Red Hat"
45 (nuff said).
46
47 I don't know how long udev will run standalone without systemd. My
48 desktop PC is running mdev. See https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Mdev and
49 https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Mdev/Automount_USB
50
51 eudev is also an option. Hopefully, device management doesn't get
52 forced into systemd.
53
54 --
55 Walter Dnes <waltdnes@××××××××.org>
56 I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev (viable) alternatives ? Tom H <tomh0665@×××××.com>