| 1 |
On 2013-03-27 10:33 AM, Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 03/27/2013 10:25 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Ok... |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> So, what is this all about? |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> Does all of this mean that udev is now going*completely* away, |
| 8 |
>> *totally* replaced by systemd? |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> If so, has there been any kind of formal announcement about this |
| 11 |
>> *anywhere*?? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> Hold your horses. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> The devs will work something out; systemd is not replacing the udev |
| 16 |
> package for all users. For the moment, it's just replacing the udev |
| 17 |
> package for users using systemd. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Thanks Michael, but that didn't *exactly* answer my question. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I thought that newer versions of udev are now *dependent* on systemd? |
| 22 |
Doesn't that mean that anyone who is using udev is also 'using' systemd? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
So, again, my question is, is udev going to be going *completely* away |
| 25 |
in the future, being *totally replaced* by systemd? Or maybe better said |
| 26 |
asked as, will udev soon just be subsumed by systemd? |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Even if this is a year or more away, I'd like to know... |
Archives