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 863E31381DF for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 18:39:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BE79E21C03E; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 18:39:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBB5C21C026 for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 18:39:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [100.42.103.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: williamh) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DFFAB340B7A for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 18:39:03 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 12:35:31 -0600 From: William Hubbs To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Changing order of default virtual/udev provider Message-ID: <20160216183531.GA1704@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <20160214203454.GF7732@vapier.lan> <56C0E7E8.9090901@gentoo.org> <20160214205038.GI7732@vapier.lan> <56c12b45.aa22b60a.9e156.4fd5@mx.google.com> <20160215102900.1693a1de@gentoo.org> <20160216174541.GA1450@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> <20160216191240.5359430f@gentoo.org> <56C36BAC.3080602@gentoo.org> 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: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="YZ5djTAD1cGYuMQK" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56C36BAC.3080602@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Archives-Salt: 661b51dd-4c92-4f5e-9790-2fd2407d5baa X-Archives-Hash: 5ffc9cbdebe26a9bc3622f6ae42cdb02 --YZ5djTAD1cGYuMQK Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 07:34:20PM +0100, Ch=C3=AD-Thanh Christopher Nguy= =E1=BB=85n wrote: > Alexis Ballier schrieb: > > It would probably generate controversy indeed, but my comment was more > > to understand what is the root of the f34R of udev being absorbed by > > systemd: "it is supposedly unsupported upstream and might not work at > > some point". > > Well, as far as I can see, you are maintaining sys-fs/udev standalone > > and don't intend to drop it. Even if you did, we could still pkgmove it > > to systemd. My conclusion is that this claim of udev being a dead end > > is pure FUD. >=20 > This claim was made by upstream, no less. And it refers to *running*=20 > udev without systemd as opposed to building (which upstream already made= =20 > impossible). >=20 > Here is the exact wording: > "Unless the systemd-haters prepare another > kdbus userspace until then this will effectively also mean that we will > not support non-systemd systems with udev anymore starting at that > point. Gentoo folks, this is your wakeup call." > https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-May/019657.html >=20 > Not sure what about this is FUD. Maybe FUD is the incorrect way to put it, but I think us doing something about it at this point is definitely premature since KDBUS is no where near ready to go -- they were forced to retract it a while back because they had to re-think the design. William --YZ5djTAD1cGYuMQK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEUEARECAAYFAlbDa/MACgkQblQW9DDEZTgoawCfetmtA5Ej8wjcW/CVJpEccXu+ MjgAlj6s0WGjFHPlMraokD9UEmnI1FI= =ehoq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --YZ5djTAD1cGYuMQK--