[gentoo-dev] udev distro vs upstream choices

[gentoo-dev] udev distro vs upstream choices

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 327 bytes --]

All,

what are the specific choices I made in udev that are distro choices vs
upstream choices. People have said to me a couple of times that there
were choices I made that are not upstream choices. If there is something
I can undo in udev to make it easier for us I will do that; I'm just not
clear on what that is.

William


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] udev distro vs upstream choices

[Samuli Suominen]

On 16/12/12 01:02, William Hubbs wrote:
> All,
>
> what are the specific choices I made in udev that are distro choices vs
> upstream choices. People have said to me a couple of times that there
> were choices I made that are not upstream choices. If there is something
> I can undo in udev to make it easier for us I will do that; I'm just not
> clear on what that is.
>
> William
>

I can think of the integration of hwdb files into hwids ebuild, but we 
are keeping those up to date with git. And it's also for eudev to use.

Can't think of anything else. I'm also very intrested about this.

Re: [gentoo-dev] udev distro vs upstream choices

[Richard Yao]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 545 bytes --]

On 12/15/2012 06:02 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> All,
> 
> what are the specific choices I made in udev that are distro choices vs
> upstream choices. People have said to me a couple of times that there
> were choices I made that are not upstream choices. If there is something
> I can undo in udev to make it easier for us I will do that; I'm just not
> clear on what that is.
> 
> William
> 

Many people would like sys-fs/udev to use the old paths in / instead of
/usr. That is the single biggest complaint people seem to have.


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 900 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: udev distro vs upstream choices

[Duncan]

Richard Yao posted on Sat, 15 Dec 2012 19:10:22 -0500 as excerpted:

> On 12/15/2012 06:02 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>> All,
>> 
>> what are the specific choices I made in udev that are distro choices vs
>> upstream choices. People have said to me a couple of times that there
>> were choices I made that are not upstream choices. If there is
>> something I can undo in udev to make it easier for us I will do that;
>> I'm just not clear on what that is.

> Many people would like sys-fs/udev to use the old paths in / instead of
> /usr. That is the single biggest complaint people seem to have.

That matches my read, as well.  In particular, that matches the claim 
that it's a distro packaging choice. Didn't one of Greg's posts 
specifically mention configure paths, or was that someone else's?  Either 
way, that's the single specific I've seen that came to mind when I later 
read the claim that it's more a matter of gentoo's udev packaging 
choices, than of upstream.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

Re: [gentoo-dev] udev distro vs upstream choices

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 717 bytes --]

On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 07:10:22PM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
> On 12/15/2012 06:02 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > All,
> > 
> > what are the specific choices I made in udev that are distro choices vs
> > upstream choices. People have said to me a couple of times that there
> > were choices I made that are not upstream choices. If there is something
> > I can undo in udev to make it easier for us I will do that; I'm just not
> > clear on what that is.
> > 
> > William
> > 
> 
> Many people would like sys-fs/udev to use the old paths in / instead of
> /usr. That is the single biggest complaint people seem to have.

If you mean adjusting the ./configure options I can look into that.

William


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] udev distro vs upstream choices

[Richard Yao]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1187 bytes --]

On 12/15/2012 10:03 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 07:10:22PM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
>> On 12/15/2012 06:02 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>>> All,
>>>
>>> what are the specific choices I made in udev that are distro choices vs
>>> upstream choices. People have said to me a couple of times that there
>>> were choices I made that are not upstream choices. If there is something
>>> I can undo in udev to make it easier for us I will do that; I'm just not
>>> clear on what that is.
>>>
>>> William
>>>
>>
>> Many people would like sys-fs/udev to use the old paths in / instead of
>> /usr. That is the single biggest complaint people seem to have.
> 
> If you mean adjusting the ./configure options I can look into that.
> 
> William
> 

If adjust the configure options, things will go back into /, but rules
and helpers installed into in /usr/lib/udev would no longer be read. You
will need a small patch to fix that. You should be able to port the
following patch from eudev to fix that:

https://github.com/gentoo/eudev/commit/036bc1a9509f5cf495817bc33624b8a4069e9f9f

It is similar to the existing patches that are used to look in /.


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 900 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] udev distro vs upstream choices

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1655 bytes --]

On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 10:35:44PM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
> On 12/15/2012 10:03 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 07:10:22PM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
> >> On 12/15/2012 06:02 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> >>> All,
> >>>
> >>> what are the specific choices I made in udev that are distro choices vs
> >>> upstream choices. People have said to me a couple of times that there
> >>> were choices I made that are not upstream choices. If there is something
> >>> I can undo in udev to make it easier for us I will do that; I'm just not
> >>> clear on what that is.
> >>>
> >>> William
> >>>
> >>
> >> Many people would like sys-fs/udev to use the old paths in / instead of
> >> /usr. That is the single biggest complaint people seem to have.
> > 
> > If you mean adjusting the ./configure options I can look into that.
> > 
> > William
> > 
> 
> If adjust the configure options, things will go back into /, but rules
> and helpers installed into in /usr/lib/udev would no longer be read. You
> will need a small patch to fix that. You should be able to port the
> following patch from eudev to fix that:
> 
> https://github.com/gentoo/eudev/commit/036bc1a9509f5cf495817bc33624b8a4069e9f9f
> 
> It is similar to the existing patches that are used to look in /.

Actually that brings up the question of whether we want to keep
/usr/lib/udev/* at all. That was introduced because of the choice I
originally made, so if we undo that choice, we can forget about reading
from there since our ebuilds have been ported to use the udev eclass to
figure out where to install that information right?

William


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] udev distro vs upstream choices

[Ian Stakenvicius]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 16/12/12 09:55 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 10:35:44PM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
>> On 12/15/2012 10:03 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>>> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 07:10:22PM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
>>>> On 12/15/2012 06:02 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>>>>> All,
>>>>> 
>>>>> what are the specific choices I made in udev that are
>>>>> distro choices vs upstream choices. People have said to me
>>>>> a couple of times that there were choices I made that are
>>>>> not upstream choices. If there is something I can undo in
>>>>> udev to make it easier for us I will do that; I'm just not 
>>>>> clear on what that is.
>>>>> 
>>>>> William
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Many people would like sys-fs/udev to use the old paths in /
>>>> instead of /usr. That is the single biggest complaint people
>>>> seem to have.
>>> 
>>> If you mean adjusting the ./configure options I can look into
>>> that.
>>> 
>>> William
>>> 
>> 
>> If adjust the configure options, things will go back into /, but
>> rules and helpers installed into in /usr/lib/udev would no longer
>> be read. You will need a small patch to fix that. You should be
>> able to port the following patch from eudev to fix that:
>> 
>> https://github.com/gentoo/eudev/commit/036bc1a9509f5cf495817bc33624b8a4069e9f9f
>>
>>
>> 
It is similar to the existing patches that are used to look in /.
> 
> Actually that brings up the question of whether we want to keep 
> /usr/lib/udev/* at all. That was introduced because of the choice
> I originally made, so if we undo that choice, we can forget about
> reading from there since our ebuilds have been ported to use the
> udev eclass to figure out where to install that information right?
> 
> William
> 

All ebuilds that will install anything into /usr/lib/udev/ use the
udev.eclass or the udev pkg-config file directly, yes.  There are
still many that install things to /lib/udev/ only (these are mainly
old ebuilds)...

As to whether or not you want to undo the /lib/udev -> /usr/lib/udev
migration, that'd be entirely up to you.  I would ask though that if
you are going to undo it, please don't stabilize a sys-fs/udev that
uses /usr/lib/udev/ as having all the stable users switch and then
switch back again is just going to be needlessly painful.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)

iF4EAREIAAYFAlDOmUIACgkQ2ugaI38ACPAHlAEAjOG5ez4mEaFiyRT2WypE+ahb
9uZtgSd+GYVdgrSMmx8A/1IsrS1Gn8Wb2wetDblzE+bW8adCWiusk/0hHtZxsyco
=MAG4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] udev distro vs upstream choices

[Samuli Suominen]

On 17/12/12 06:02, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 16/12/12 09:55 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 10:35:44PM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
>>> On 12/15/2012 10:03 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 07:10:22PM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
>>>>> On 12/15/2012 06:02 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>>>>>> All,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> what are the specific choices I made in udev that are
>>>>>> distro choices vs upstream choices. People have said to me
>>>>>> a couple of times that there were choices I made that are
>>>>>> not upstream choices. If there is something I can undo in
>>>>>> udev to make it easier for us I will do that; I'm just not
>>>>>> clear on what that is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> William
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Many people would like sys-fs/udev to use the old paths in /
>>>>> instead of /usr. That is the single biggest complaint people
>>>>> seem to have.
>>>>
>>>> If you mean adjusting the ./configure options I can look into
>>>> that.
>>>>
>>>> William
>>>>
>>>
>>> If adjust the configure options, things will go back into /, but
>>> rules and helpers installed into in /usr/lib/udev would no longer
>>> be read. You will need a small patch to fix that. You should be
>>> able to port the following patch from eudev to fix that:
>>>
>>> https://github.com/gentoo/eudev/commit/036bc1a9509f5cf495817bc33624b8a4069e9f9f
>>>
>>>
>>>
> It is similar to the existing patches that are used to look in /.
>>
>> Actually that brings up the question of whether we want to keep
>> /usr/lib/udev/* at all. That was introduced because of the choice
>> I originally made, so if we undo that choice, we can forget about
>> reading from there since our ebuilds have been ported to use the
>> udev eclass to figure out where to install that information right?
>>
>> William
>>
>
> All ebuilds that will install anything into /usr/lib/udev/ use the
> udev.eclass or the udev pkg-config file directly, yes.  There are
> still many that install things to /lib/udev/ only (these are mainly
> old ebuilds)...
>
> As to whether or not you want to undo the /lib/udev -> /usr/lib/udev
> migration, that'd be entirely up to you.  I would ask though that if
> you are going to undo it, please don't stabilize a sys-fs/udev that
> uses /usr/lib/udev/ as having all the stable users switch and then
> switch back again is just going to be needlessly painful.

+1

Re: [gentoo-dev] udev distro vs upstream choices

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1930 bytes --]

On Sun, 16 Dec 2012 20:55:57 -0600
William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 10:35:44PM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
> > On 12/15/2012 10:03 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > > On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 07:10:22PM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
> > >> On 12/15/2012 06:02 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > >>> All,
> > >>>
> > >>> what are the specific choices I made in udev that are distro choices vs
> > >>> upstream choices. People have said to me a couple of times that there
> > >>> were choices I made that are not upstream choices. If there is something
> > >>> I can undo in udev to make it easier for us I will do that; I'm just not
> > >>> clear on what that is.
> > >>>
> > >>> William
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Many people would like sys-fs/udev to use the old paths in / instead of
> > >> /usr. That is the single biggest complaint people seem to have.
> > > 
> > > If you mean adjusting the ./configure options I can look into that.
> > > 
> > > William
> > > 
> > 
> > If adjust the configure options, things will go back into /, but rules
> > and helpers installed into in /usr/lib/udev would no longer be read. You
> > will need a small patch to fix that. You should be able to port the
> > following patch from eudev to fix that:
> > 
> > https://github.com/gentoo/eudev/commit/036bc1a9509f5cf495817bc33624b8a4069e9f9f
> > 
> > It is similar to the existing patches that are used to look in /.
> 
> Actually that brings up the question of whether we want to keep
> /usr/lib/udev/* at all. That was introduced because of the choice I
> originally made, so if we undo that choice, we can forget about reading
> from there since our ebuilds have been ported to use the udev eclass to
> figure out where to install that information right?

Just please lemme test it first, so I could tell you whether systemd
still works with it.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 316 bytes --]