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 TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F8B2139085 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 09:43:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 90B562340E9; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 09:43:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com (ironport2-out.teksavvy.com [206.248.154.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 35E2E234024 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 09:43:35 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0BJFAAu3EVY/x6cSC1dGwEBAQMBAQEJAQEBgzgBAQEBAR9agQaIT4R4lwomAZRWgX8JHg2FcQQCAoIRQBQBAgEBAQEBAQFiKIRoAQEBAQIBATkcKAsLGAkTEg8FFBE3iGcIDq0Gi0QBAQgCIAWFRXmEW4UUgmWCMAWPfIUAhWoBgXuET4VthFKKEBeGI44ChA0fN4EZhBCBYyA0AYh4AQEB X-IPAS-Result: A0BJFAAu3EVY/x6cSC1dGwEBAQMBAQEJAQEBgzgBAQEBAR9agQaIT4R4lwomAZRWgX8JHg2FcQQCAoIRQBQBAgEBAQEBAQFiKIRoAQEBAQIBATkcKAsLGAkTEg8FFBE3iGcIDq0Gi0QBAQgCIAWFRXmEW4UUgmWCMAWPfIUAhWoBgXuET4VthFKKEBeGI44ChA0fN4EZhBCBYyA0AYh4AQEB X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,749,1477972800"; d="scan'208";a="283522781" Received: from 45-72-156-30.cpe.teksavvy.com (HELO waltdnes.org) ([45.72.156.30]) by smtp.teksavvy.com with SMTP; 22 Dec 2016 04:43:32 -0500 Received: by waltdnes.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 22 Dec 2016 04:43:32 -0500 From: "Walter Dnes" Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 04:43:32 -0500 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No Message-ID: <20161222094332.GA32183@waltdnes.org> References: <1539590.2abgqJ6fBz@thetick> <20161220225155.GA6010@acm.fritz.box> <8ceb1f71-e8c3-d7ec-9d0e-6025baa0a296@gentoo.org> <20161222011934.GD10145@sporkbox> 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=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161222011934.GD10145@sporkbox> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Archives-Salt: 9c970340-d882-41f2-ad03-b74ccf6248bd X-Archives-Hash: 6d0cb96d226b7e6356ff82b8c52c3c8d On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 05:19:35PM -0800, Daniel Campbell wrote > On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 07:53:51AM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote: > > > How do you think we ended up with eudev? > > I assume we ended up with eudev because upstream decided that > they were going back on their promise that udev would remain usable > without systemd. (I can fish up the e-mail -- sent by Lennart himself > -- if you'd like. It may take some time) To this day it still is, but > that's only until the successor to kdbus wriggles itself into the > kernel. At that point, they will have the leverage (and the excuse, in > their minds) to drop all support for udev outside of systemd. https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2012-August/006066.html > Well, we intent to continue to make it possible to run udevd outside > of systemd. But that's about it. We will not polish that, or add > new features to that or anything. > > OTOH we do polish behaviour of udev when used *within* systemd > however, and that's our primary focus. > > And what we will certainly not do is compromise the uniform > integration into systemd for some cosmetic improvements for > non-systemd systems. > > (Yes, udev on non-systemd systems is in our eyes a dead end, in case > you haven't noticed it yet. I am looking forward to the day when we > can drop that support entirely.) > > Lennart > > -- > Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. Right now the "stand-alone udev" actually requires building the entire systemd+udev combo, and then copying just the udev parts. I remember Anthony Basile mentioning that he had refactored the code during the the udev ==> eudev conversion process, and removed over a hundred uncalled functions. They were probably part of udev's integration into systemd. So one advantage of eudev is that it has less memory footprint and attack surface. > eudev is an attempt to retain udev as it was originally -- init > agnostic. At some point in the future, it will become the only way to > get udev outside of systemd. Agreed. -- Walter Dnes I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications