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 1Riaoq-0006Ci-J2 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 05 Jan 2012 00:04:35 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 603A621C0A8; Thu, 5 Jan 2012 00:04:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-we0-f181.google.com (mail-we0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F57D21C05B for ; Thu, 5 Jan 2012 00:03:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by werm12 with SMTP id m12so11001381wer.40 for ; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 16:03:01 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:organization :x-mailer:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=FnoCNBYM0QAo4A3xUe0AfGQTgrvVHL3vJ2rTZsr18TI=; b=BbRB5MWJCdYji7/s2OIcNp0rqQrRYjtFrceYZ/xx+Z4waqe8idLzQOXZXZSlu/glYQ s4Sh1bey9kjXka6AEqQtmI4evNMcZe0jWCYALHYU9bsTbCPsxK06sQULar1Qr+cr10mg aTdUAAZObe3v5YWCUSOCynipcemUaHl/YQnno= Received: by 10.216.134.196 with SMTP id s46mr32296288wei.44.1325721781841; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 16:03:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from rohan.example.com (196-215-2-107.dynamic.isadsl.co.za. [196.215.2.107]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id gf8sm13143343wbb.11.2012.01.04.16.02.59 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 04 Jan 2012 16:03:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2012 02:02:54 +0200 From: Alan McKinnon To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Beta test Gentoo with mdev instead of udev; version 3 Message-ID: <20120105020254.455da0df@rohan.example.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20111115062115.GA3262@waltdnes.org> <20111121104724.GC7461@waltdnes.org> <20111201194544.GD4455@waltdnes.org> <20120103100445.GD1961@waltdnes.org> <20120103123209.GB2410@nicolas-desktop> <20120103131346.GC2410@nicolas-desktop> <20120103143120.GF2410@nicolas-desktop> <20120103221555.22c778a3@digimed.co.uk> <4F038C23.5030708@gmail.com> <4F04E1B4.3050901@gmail.com> Organization: Internet Solutions X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.8 (GTK+ 2.24.4; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 3bf249af-3717-4d66-b6f5-01bd32de6e45 X-Archives-Hash: 74ae5bf159d429bdd14734a06841e746 On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 18:49:29 -0500 Michael Mol wrote: > > As I said about my ex once, time tells. =C2=A0Sometimes, time is the > > only thing that does tell too. =C2=A0Reminds me of wine although I don't > > drink it. =20 >=20 > I think it's absolutely ridiculous to look at udev and mdev as winner > or loser. I'm not trying to be even-handed or fair in this; I just > think they service different needs. >=20 > Currently, the only advantage I see for udev in a server is the > ability to give network interfaces meaningful names... Even that isn't all that useful for me. For my servers I know exactly which interface is which (turns out that when Dell give you 4 on-board nics they always come up in the same order. Pretty useful.) We do the proper thing and document every bit of hardware in a central repo (ocsng makes this automagic) and the way it is when the box is racked is the way it stays till it's switched off 5 years later. Aside from disks and RAM I've only had 2 hardware failures in 4 years (both were Adaptec RAID cards) so changing hardware is an unusual event (and rather major at that when it does happen). For me, udev is more of a hindrance in the data centre than a help. I simply do not need it at all, so mdev interests me a lot. On my notebooks and test/development VMs, that's different. Those need udev. On something as complex as a node manager, I do not believe there is such a thing as one-size fits all or a universal design. --=20 Alan McKinnnon alan.mckinnon@gmail.com