From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1R5YqB-0007RM-Pv for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 08:04:35 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E016621C3D2; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 08:04:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from arsenic.logifi.fr (arsenic.logifi.fr [217.108.178.219]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0994021C122 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 08:03:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from nicolas-desktop (unknown [192.168.8.78]) by arsenic.logifi.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id B87EA20031; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 09:20:13 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:03:00 +0200 From: Nicolas Sebrecht To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: Nicolas Sebrecht Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: udev and /usr Message-ID: <20110919080300.GA2401@nicolas-desktop> References: <1740055.XA9oyAS8HQ@eve> <1884169.5d71snpPpZ@eve> <3215539.x3CMH0d0eb@eve> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 16ceda1bd5da6889bee4b7578890f71b The 18/09/11, Duncan wrote: > > I don't see any added benefit from using DBUS on my servers. Insterstingly, Duncan just answered your question... > Interesting question. I hadn't seen the suggestion until this thread, > either, and it bothered me too. >From here: > With a moment's thought, I decided I could probably return to a semi- > static dev setup reasonably easily. I'd potentially turn on the early-dev > option in the kernel that I still have off, ATM, which presumably would > mount a tmpfs on dev and populate it with the earliest devices. After > that, if necessary, I'd copy the existing udev-created nodes out to a > persistent state dir, and copy them back in with a little init-time > script of my own. As long as the device ordering remains stable, this > could include by-label, etc, symlinks, or I could simply kill the by- > label, by-uid stuff in fstab, and go back to traditional devices there, > too. > > Either that, or simply go back to a static /dev entirely. > > People with dynamic ordered devices may have to devise their own scripts, > tho, or perhaps more likely, fork off udev from the pre-union state. ...to here. > But it's also possible that's far enough in the future that we can't > really answer the question now, since technology will have changed enough > to make an answer now look senseless, then. Consider trying to answer > the question in terms of the kernel devfs back before udev. The tech > simply changed and those answers wouldn't really work, today. Upstream changes the init process is done. So, you're free to either: stick to upstream (with best long term support); or fork off upstream (requires knowledges, manpower and time); or go back to 1960 with a full/partial static /dev (asking to manually maintain the crap). See the benenfit, now? -- Nicolas Sebrecht