From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19095138247 for ; Sat, 9 Nov 2013 22:12:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6C3A5E0AA9; Sat, 9 Nov 2013 22:11:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from qmta01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.30.16]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C135E0A92 for ; Sat, 9 Nov 2013 22:11:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from omta22.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.89]) by qmta01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id na6t1m0031vN32cA1aBqRf; Sat, 09 Nov 2013 22:11:50 +0000 Received: from crud.chemoelectric.org ([66.41.30.59]) by omta22.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id naBp1m0011GXozm8iaBprp; Sat, 09 Nov 2013 22:11:50 +0000 Received: by crud.chemoelectric.org (Postfix, from userid 1501) id A5C102187418C; Sat, 9 Nov 2013 16:11:48 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2013 16:11:48 -0600 From: Barry Schwartz To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: USB Scanner Problems with Newer Kernels/Libusb Message-ID: <20131109221148.GA26666@crud> References: <20131108222553.33af27243ad5aa2411c3f0ff@comcast.net> <20131109114529.f29b71e10f00f6a8b170d0e8@comcast.net> <20131109204021.GA28493@crud> <20131109163813.e0b90b87aefd17c03054af8c@comcast.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20131109163813.e0b90b87aefd17c03054af8c@comcast.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20121106; t=1384035110; bh=irHJZ7vMPYE4O9KNY7clXQ7f7d0jLVt9dZYs62z+9XA=; h=Received:Received:Received:Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=hby24KWdSrb7ob7xg50ctfSbHrJJiDIsrK0ViUk8nBjvnX2Zw5NZEUBVj9FqXgurX cAoe4QSILk2VaCyREN5eF6q+EBdXCYTNE/Ct7XvTcFTFq+taGDm7L/6/N6Ltmc8uDZ xtwH7mWz232G5SwsGOGUhdfnWUtOviAW67vxl4f6JZwYuz+lxoDLuqu+Q8OP88Im+a joySKaE7Y5h998yyrLliVCi33peXEMkW8BgHeT+kAeZmM0YQVQThZtH1mR+rXi14Ge sfDJ5fAvH4tS6qXf1xnXDYcv6dtv88a1jsA9ANkiPUaNQvw/6C3lrubU/l8RZ7jsk5 E6pWPesEZG0aw== X-Archives-Salt: 4cbb58ee-65d3-47fd-8055-01c7d00e5e7a X-Archives-Hash: efb5912e331a3ccca71a9f1a72651774 Frank Peters skribis: > Right now I am investigating if I can employ the udev daemon to create > the necessary devices, when needed, in the /dev tree. IOW, I want to find > out if I can just start the daemon, plug in the scanner, and have udev create > the things I need. Then, when I am done scanning, I can just shut off the > daemon. This method should allow me to use udev (or eudev) only when > I need to use it. Otherwise it would not be running. Maybe you can run it once even as a non-daemon just to create the device, similarly to running rescan-scsi-bus. > > because it is quite a disaster, and is becoming all > > rolled up in the attempt to turn ‘Linux’ from a kernel into a > > ‘vertically integrated’ variant of MacOS. > > IMHO, those folks at freedesktop.org are going to destroy the simplicity, > beauty, and diverse utility of Linux. Yes. Particularly distressing because they are completely neglecting GNUstep, which is an existing _thoughtful_ attempt to reconcile Unix/GNU with an integrated desktop non-Unix folk would find familiar. > I downloaded and examined sytemd to try to learn more about the udev > process. What a convoluted mess! Compared to the simple and straightforward > boot-up and device system which I have implemented on my machines, systemd > is a confusing morass. For what reason? I can boot up and configure my > entire machine using a single bash script of 155 lines (including the comments). > Why would I want to replace that comfort and ease with the expansive cacophony > that is systemd? I like baselayout but as a former Slackware user also have a strong appreciation of a BSD-style write-a-script-for-each-runlevel. Nothing could be simpler. I have never investigated systemd too deeply, but simply know that I am lost trying to play with runlevels on an Ubuntu/Debian system. (There is also the Hurd approach of not needing such scripts in the first place, but, alas, that is not transferable to Linux.)