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 68A02138E66 for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 20:05:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 35394E0B0B; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 20:05:37 +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 41D66E0A92 for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 20:05:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f180.google.com (mail-wi0-f180.google.com [209.85.212.180]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: floppym) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E255B33FA8F for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 20:05:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wi0-f180.google.com with SMTP id hm4so1268742wib.1 for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 12:05:32 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=/zsq0Xt4TrgxgwAOu55eklkXOXeKcs5NU1W8r9yF6bM=; b=NAMPhaxgLUe+dG87yo+YbQNrTJjl6AQ8LrxoZcEgcE42ZLm8GeRiDqHTxgDizZeSmI 4ozknRXCEj1obRf+imN7TmSVYMwlCuDaDM86OgzWG55l/L99nGTgzn9H9C0i51gvvPaC E4OjhhkDb3tTgovZ9jiMhoe4WV2VRqAP+Io9fC3UgB2M1txj91Rrne+8eEH2R/6WiVaM +EHpzstOlwirKJN/4eumWg0XlQN6/+8yisC2jI2C8ereNqksDPVMU8PZor59ZbXt/HCM OqQgnJb1xaufDmeOgglEK9E9Pz2vzyGcK0kTjcOyBYzWy+Hlvvyi2zQ4ExhP0hbvLK6z ytEQ== 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 X-Received: by 10.181.12.9 with SMTP id em9mr4774119wid.37.1393358732145; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 12:05:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.194.162.229 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 12:05:32 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20140225204410.24d3b004@shanghai.paradoxon.rec> References: <530C1C98.4040004@gentoo.org> <20140225083850.63b01753@shanghai.paradoxon.rec> <20140225184623.10311.qmail@stuge.se> <20140225204410.24d3b004@shanghai.paradoxon.rec> Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 15:05:32 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] News item draft for >=sys-fs/udev-209 upgrade From: Mike Gilbert To: Gentoo Dev Cc: peter@stuge.se Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: ba9537e0-3374-4227-b3c6-deb23c8ebfb9 X-Archives-Hash: 1953cd5a07b79cc84f03c6c9eb86f7bd On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Lars Wendler wrote: > On Tue, 25 Feb 2014 19:46:23 +0100 Peter Stuge wrote: > >>Lars Wendler wrote: >>> >> - try to prevent most naming pollution of pure udev with systemd >>> >> crap. >>> > >>> >childish. me don't like pink ponies. pink too much. pony okay. >>> >>> Riiight... as udev has anything else to do with systemd other than >>> being uselessly integrated into systemd whereas it can still work on >>> its own with no whatsoever relation to systemd. But yes, totally >>> childish... >> >>I wouldn't say childish but it doesn't seem too useful to me. It >>seems clear (at least to me) that even if there isn't so tight >>integration of udev with systemd today it's reasonable to expect >>that there will be tight integration in the soonish future, as >>upstream continues to move in the direction they like. >> >>There's nothing wrong per se with a future udev ebuild which >>applies a mega-patch onto systemd sources in order to get udevd >>standalone but I think that's probably not the most useful >>contribution you can make to Gentoo, Lars. >> >>Of course in the end you should work on what you like, but in your >>place I would probably focus on something else, probably eudev. >> >> >>//Peter > > As long as it's feasible I will continue patching the systemd crap out > of udev. > The worst part always was and still is the man pages as one cannot > re-use previous patches on them. Whatever systemd maniacs are doing > there, it's the most time consuming part of the patching. > The fun part is, it's still quite easy to get udev standalone without > anything being related to systemd (with the exception of the systemd > unit files which still can be used with my ebuilds). > Don't oversell this; your changes are purely cosmetic and really amount to renaming a few files. udev still includes code from several systemd helper libraries; it just gets linked in statically.