| 1 |
On 12/08/13 15:19, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@×××××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> On 2013-08-12 8:06 AM, Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> |
| 6 |
>>> True, it won't be dropped for long as people are maintaining it. That's |
| 7 |
>>> how maintainership works. |
| 8 |
>>> But trying to lie to people it's somehow solving something currently is |
| 9 |
>>> annoying as 'ell and should be corrected where seen. |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> It is solving the problem of *when* (not if - if the words I have read from the systemd maintainers can be taken at face value) the systemd maintainers decide to pull the plug on the ability to have a systemd-less udev... |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Correct. And because that we endorse it. |
| 16 |
> Look what happened with the logind. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
They made it clear from the start that logind is not going to work for |
| 19 |
non-systemd and that Ubuntu is doing something utter crazy. |
| 20 |
We were going to ride with that horse at the expense of Ubuntu folks for |
| 21 |
a while, but dropped the effort as futile. Now Ubuntu is stuck at |
| 22 |
logind-204 and it's unclear what will they do next. |
| 23 |
Don't try to twist it into anything it's not, it's not comparable w/ udev. |
Archives