1 |
Mike Edenfield wrote: |
2 |
>> From: Dale [mailto:rdalek1967@×××××.com] |
3 |
> |
4 |
>> This has been one of my points too. I could go out and buy me a bluetooth |
5 |
>> mouse/keyboard but I don't because it to complicates matters. |
6 |
> |
7 |
> I had a long reply to Walt that I (probably wisely) decided not to send, but |
8 |
> the basic point of it is also relevant here. My response to his (IMO |
9 |
> needlessly aggressive) email was basically this: |
10 |
> |
11 |
> Why *shouldn't I* be able to go but a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse if I |
12 |
> wanted to? Those things *work perfectly fine with udev*. And why wouldn't I |
13 |
> want to use the *same* solution for all of my various machines, even if that |
14 |
> solution is "overkill" for half of them? Just because my laptop doesn't need |
15 |
> bluetoothd support in udev doesn't mean using udev there *is bad*. (I don't |
16 |
> need 80% of what's in the Linux kernel but I still install one...) |
17 |
> |
18 |
> I am not in any way denigrating the work he's doing. I think it's awesome |
19 |
> and I've tried to help where I can. But I'm pretty fed up with people like |
20 |
> him acting as if the current udev solution is the end of the world. I've |
21 |
> heard it called everything from "design mistake" to "out of control truck |
22 |
> full of manure". |
23 |
> |
24 |
> I have three PCs in my home running Gentoo. Two of them would boot correctly |
25 |
> using Walt's new solution (mdev and no /usr mounted at boot) and one would |
26 |
> not. *All three of them* boot correctly using udev. 100% success > 66% |
27 |
> success, so clearly the udev solution is a perfectly legitimate solution to |
28 |
> a real world problem. At work, those numbers are likely different, and |
29 |
> Walt's solution might be a working approach -- if udev didn't already work |
30 |
> fine in 100% of those cases, too. |
31 |
> |
32 |
> Instead of asking why everyone else should be "forced" to use the udev |
33 |
> solution *that already works*, you should be focusing on explaining to |
34 |
> everyone else the reasons why it is worth the time and effort to configure |
35 |
> *something different* for those same machines. There was a reason why people |
36 |
> stopped using static /dev, and devfs; maybe there is a reason why people |
37 |
> should stop using udev, but thus far that reason seems to be "initramfs |
38 |
> makes us cranky." |
39 |
> |
40 |
> There's no need to get mean-spirited just because you choose a different |
41 |
> audience that freedesktop.org as the target for your solution. It just makes |
42 |
> you look petty and childish. Produce an alternative to |
43 |
> "udev/initramfs/single root" that works, provide (accurate) details on the |
44 |
> differences, and let users pick which one they want. |
45 |
> |
46 |
> --Mike |
47 |
> |
48 |
> |
49 |
> |
50 |
|
51 |
|
52 |
I have a question or two. If udev was going to *break* your bluetooth |
53 |
keyboard, what would you say then? To me, having a bluetooth keyboard |
54 |
is a bit out there. If udev was going to break a PS/2 keyboard, what |
55 |
would you say then? I suspect PS/2 keyboards outnumber bluetooth and |
56 |
most likely by a wide margin. |
57 |
|
58 |
Right now, udev is going to ruin my system while yours works. What if |
59 |
it was going to make my system work while breaking yours? Would you |
60 |
make the same argument? |
61 |
|
62 |
One other question, does your BIOS allow you to use your bluetooth |
63 |
keyboard? |
64 |
|
65 |
Just a thought. I'm going to take my meds. Ya'll argue for a while. |
66 |
|
67 |
Dale |
68 |
|
69 |
:-) :-) |
70 |
|
71 |
-- |
72 |
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or |
73 |
how you interpreted my words! |
74 |
|
75 |
Miss the compile output? Hint: |
76 |
EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--quiet-build=n" |