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 1RiQf3-0001r0-PG for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 13:13:45 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CD60721C02F; Wed, 4 Jan 2012 13:13:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ey0-f181.google.com (mail-ey0-f181.google.com [209.85.215.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 433F421C026 for ; Wed, 4 Jan 2012 13:13:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by eaai1 with SMTP id i1so11980346eaa.40 for ; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 05:13:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=tfA4htExDD3WZ5A5El4xd+0TOEq3rfnCI33fM9KeNRk=; b=V+Uy89GloCMrve6QfD5/v6aBe/UJ2c7poblllmpBaUvR/tebNexFa+BLh+aUQQKubJ ehJ1VHzHnvxNP38+cob2gBrrqT6xh9k/XGaV+A7jDsrgtaL9pJR1ANalto6WjI7U4ScP hacvQDLsniVHDPiW+gDGy4rd7QoClJ50vfN8U= 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 Received: by 10.205.121.138 with SMTP id gc10mr13237936bkc.3.1325682784226; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 05:13:04 -0800 (PST) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.204.19.1 with HTTP; Wed, 4 Jan 2012 05:13:03 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20120101015947.GA9914@linux1> <20120103095157.GC1961@waltdnes.org> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 08:13:03 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: MRWYRu5u9duv6Fw77A-92KYAH90 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: 1d96402c-2c67-475a-9211-6bdc50079a14 X-Archives-Hash: 056b172210b72a03cad421f476ffd23e On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 7:58 AM, Arun Raghavan wrote: > Does mdev support all the rules we have in /lib/udev/rules.d/? The > Internet is surprisingly mute on this subject, but a quick grep > through the busybox source doesn't turn up anything that suggests that > it might. I think the main use case for mdev is to do a one-time creation of typical device nodes with minimal use of resources. Perhaps you might say mdev is to udev as dash is to bash (though dash is syntax-compatible with bash, or at least it aims to be, and I'm not sure the same is true of mdev vs udev). If you're running a server or embedded device and you just need it to detect your hard drives and maybe a few devices you're willing to write scripts for, then it is a perfect choice. I have no idea how well it supports hotplugging of usb devices and such. For a desktop - it seems like a poor choice. By the time you enhanced it to do everything udev does you'll ruin it for embedded use and probably be stuck with all the same issues we have with udev. Fork udev if you must (good luck with that), but I don't really see mdev as being a real competitor. By all means write up an mdev howto and link it in the embedded guide or if enough users are passionate about it perhaps even link it in the handbook (as an alternative for adventurous users with special needs). However, I just can't see it ever becoming the default on a general-purpose distro like Gentoo (which aims to be all things to all people as much as is supportable). Certainly it is in the spirit of Gentoo to support it as an option for those willing to deal with the downsides (don't expect your bluetooth keyboard to work automagically, etc). Rich