From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCC85158089 for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2023 23:34:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0CE4D2BC020; Thu, 14 Sep 2023 23:34:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (woodpecker.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C48632BC017 for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2023 23:34:05 +0000 (UTC) References: <7802203.lOV4Wx5bFT@kona> <92dfbb91650e4fe9c82268ccddf8b0ab.squirrel@ukinbox.ecrypt.net> <4270953.Sgy9Pd6rRy@pinacolada> <25616924cf66471fbd1075753551dffa.squirrel@ukinbox.ecrypt.net> <7B549F95-5EEA-4DD3-A046-AA6F2C7B6349@gentoo.org> <5aa46e8fd2c09e8d54c6a9ec71725529.squirrel@ukinbox.ecrypt.net> <6e35ba9b-a55b-4b36-9d79-96faa5fb1dc6@gentoo.org> <0daf33d92cd33094b88c0411a16a63ac.squirrel@ukinbox.ecrypt.net> <50d2d8a5796c8f71b58747d3f23593dd.squirrel@ukinbox.ecrypt.net> User-agent: mu4e 1.10.6; emacs 30.0.50 From: Arsen =?utf-8?Q?Arsenovi=C4=87?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] last rites: sys-fs/eudev Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2023 01:19:22 +0200 In-reply-to: Message-ID: <86ttrws520.fsf@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 X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: a2b93d86-36e5-4764-9ab3-744ec856fc50 X-Archives-Hash: 63ac64840fa73b34a3649ed13f203e10 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable "Eddie Chapman" writes: > Not aiming this at you personally but this argument has been made more > than once in this thread and I personally don't think it carries any > weight, because it can be levelled at anyone who raises an issue about > anything. If you don't like it, then just go and roll your own. ::gentoo is supposed to be a coherent set of packages provided by Gentoo developers, with a reasonable scope. eudev no longer fits into the 'coherent' part of that definition, and there are zero advantages to it over systemd-utils[udev]. The _only_ difference between a sys-fs/eudev::eudev and sys-fs/eudev::gentoo package that would exist if the former were to be made into an overlay is that Gentoo developers would be responsible for the latter. There are no Gentoo developers interested in being responsible for the latter (AFAIK), and there is no tangible benefit to the latter for any Gentoo developer to latch onto. Seeing as there is at least half a dozen people seemingly interested in maintaining eudev, why not just form an overlay? This way, virtual/{,lib}udev doesn't get polluted with implementations which don't fullfil the definition of a virtual provider in ::gentoo, nor with use-flag hacks, but users which wish to use eudev still have access to it, and upstream eudev gets half a dozen potential contributors, which are needed, _badly_. At risk of repeating myself, I'd like to point out again that the only viable approach for eudev upstream to take is to re-fork systemd and find a viable way to stay up-to-date, while fixing up incompatibilities with musl. I've made proposals a few years ago and restated them in this thread. > Of course I know I (and anyone else) can do that. So then what's the > point of discussing anything then? Just because an argument is widely applicable does not make it invalid. Note that this argument is seldom the first resort, since, as you note, it's not overly productive. Indeed, it was not the first resort here. sys-fs/eudev has long overstayed the original removal plan. > What's the point of having a big tree with hundreds of packages? Why > not have a very minimal tree instead and let everyone go and run > multiple independent repos so we can all do what we want? Then we > wouldn't have any discussion about what to include and what not. In > fact maybe that's not a bad idea. I'm not sure how to fit this within the context of the thread. Have a lovely evening. =2D-=20 Arsen Arsenovi=C4=87 --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iOcEARYKAI8WIQT+4rPRE/wAoxYtYGFSwpQwHqLEkwUCZQOYZ18UgAAAAAAuAChp c3N1ZXItZnByQG5vdGF0aW9ucy5vcGVucGdwLmZpZnRoaG9yc2VtYW4ubmV0RkVF MkIzRDExM0ZDMDBBMzE2MkQ2MDYxNTJDMjk0MzAxRUEyQzQ5MxEcYXJzZW5AZ2Vu dG9vLm9yZwAKCRBSwpQwHqLEk2sSAQD/BavX5t9c7XtnQyDfnNYzJertxSaxLZAU xoxT2wfgVwD/ZBiI7FpjG/ZeJxEaDK743D9Gr1bF68NP013/fVQ+Ugw= =YjgS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--