1 |
Hello, Canek |
2 |
|
3 |
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 06:07:32PM -0600, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: |
4 |
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Alan Mackenzie <acm@×××.de> wrote: |
5 |
|
6 |
> > The new hardware will "just work" if there are the correct drivers |
7 |
> >built in. That's as true of udev as it is of mdev as it is of the old |
8 |
> >static /dev with mknod. |
9 |
|
10 |
> No, it is not. You are letting out the sine qua non of the matter: the |
11 |
> device has to be built, *and the /dev file should exists*. I hope you |
12 |
> are not suggesting that we put *ALL* the possible files under /dev, |
13 |
> because that was the idea before devfs, and it doesn't work *IN |
14 |
> GENERAL*. |
15 |
|
16 |
Previously you made appropriate /dev entries with mknod, giving the |
17 |
device major and minor numbers as parameters. This appeared to work in |
18 |
general - I'm not aware of any device it didn't work for. |
19 |
|
20 |
> So, you need something to handle device files on /dev, so you don't |
21 |
> need every possible device file for every possible piece of hardware. |
22 |
> But then you want to handle the same device with the same device name, |
23 |
> so you need some kind of database. Then for the majority of users, |
24 |
> they want to see *something* happen when they connect aa piece of |
25 |
> hardware to their computers. |
26 |
|
27 |
That happened under the old static /dev system. What was that /dev |
28 |
system, if not a database matching /dev names to device numbers? I'm not |
29 |
sure what you mean by "same device" and "same device name". |
30 |
|
31 |
> So you need to handle the events associated with the connections (or |
32 |
> discovery, for things like Bluetooth) of the devices, and since udev is |
33 |
> already handling the database and the detection of |
34 |
> connections/discovery, I agree with the decision of leting udev to |
35 |
> execute programs when something gets connected. You could get that |
36 |
> function in another program, but you are only moving the problem, *and |
37 |
> it can also happen very early at boot time*, so lets udev handle it all |
38 |
> the time. |
39 |
|
40 |
Early in boot time, you only need things like disk drives, graphic cards |
41 |
and keyboards. Anything else can be postponed till late boot time. |
42 |
|
43 |
> I hope you see where I'm going. As I said before, mdev could (in |
44 |
> theory) do the same that udev does. But then it will be as complicated |
45 |
> as udev, *because it is a complicated problem* in general. And I again |
46 |
> use my fuel injection analogy: it is not *necessary*. It is just very |
47 |
> damn convenient. |
48 |
|
49 |
It may be a complicated problem in general, but many people do not need |
50 |
that generality. I suspect the vast majority don't need it. Neither the |
51 |
typical desktop, the typical server, nor typical embedded devices like |
52 |
routers. |
53 |
|
54 |
> I have a really time understanding why you don't see the complexity on |
55 |
> the problem. I explained above: it is a complicated problem (when |
56 |
> dealing with the general case), and therefore the (general) solution is |
57 |
> bound to be also complicated. |
58 |
|
59 |
I've had a hard time understanding, because up till now, nobody's |
60 |
described the problem in detail - there's only been hand-waving. |
61 |
|
62 |
> You want it simple? Tha'ts fine, it is possible. It's just that it |
63 |
> will not solve the general problem, just a very specific subset of it. |
64 |
|
65 |
That subset used by the vast majority of Linux users. And yes, I do want |
66 |
it simple, because elegant simplicity is the best way, IMAO. You, on the |
67 |
other hand, seem to love complicated solutions because they are "the way |
68 |
forward". We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. |
69 |
|
70 |
> Just as mdev is doing; Walt just posted an email explaining that if |
71 |
> you use GNOME, KDE, XFCE, or LVM2, mdev is not for you. |
72 |
|
73 |
Walter is, I believe, mistaken here. I can mount and use my LVM2 |
74 |
partitions. Gnome looks like it comes up OK, but that could be moot, |
75 |
since right now I haven't got keyboard/mouse drivers under the X server. |
76 |
|
77 |
> I will not be surprised if in the future the list of programs "not for |
78 |
> mdev" only grows. |
79 |
|
80 |
There's a difference between "needed by portage" and "doesn't work under |
81 |
mdev". As I say, it will all be moot if the evdev driver won't work |
82 |
under mdev. |
83 |
|
84 |
> Regards. |
85 |
> -- |
86 |
> Canek Peláez Valdés |
87 |
> Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación |
88 |
> Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México |
89 |
|
90 |
-- |
91 |
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany). |