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 C7839138010 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 16:42:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 321EAE0901; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 16:42:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ye0-f177.google.com (mail-ye0-f177.google.com [209.85.213.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D13C4E08F7 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 16:42:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ye0-f177.google.com with SMTP id l14so165785yen.22 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 09:42:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=iYR3zvAg8Bpkwa+3dzBoCYY/s6ge84WHh5lDLP2wePU=; b=v/wwIjibAH4EICeJTWUwYHqiIezV5mixZdPiOm9k8s3TbSsWCGLAcrFg+ZCcwMkZJa +zVIJQap6nOidxjJNhw9F+aMkE78H8hkwCy0PSG3heG8OMAc+DaWe28Ar5DCormC1O0n 5AzDawmwht93WuaufPddjpUrbP0OQveNiDePfyXIfKHXSpkATDPgn6EN0z+9D7cuu8Li xFtIvjg7qQMkFH9Crt0w9eW50quhIo1bA7Nz5QGS7LEfAtUAm3x0IQ05myJGPj4/4oot ZX3CXTrHPTbk1WyN/s/fYxZvnkQMhJx0webVby+17V69p2AE7DPotGo0qxA/P8S8gt66 kpnw== X-Received: by 10.236.125.82 with SMTP id y58mr3920900yhh.171.1364661722893; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 09:42:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.5] (adsl-98-95-109-5.jan.bellsouth.net. [98.95.109.5]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t9sm10790108yhh.0.2013.03.30.09.42.01 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 30 Mar 2013 09:42:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <515715D8.2040505@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2013 11:42:00 -0500 From: Dale User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:19.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/19.0 SeaMonkey/2.16.2 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 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: eudev - is it a viable *long-term* option? - WAS: Re: [gentoo-user] Updating our live servers. I'm scared! References: <5154744D.9080805@orlitzky.com> <515488B8.4010201@gmail.com> <5156F93A.5000408@libertytrek.org> <5156FAF0.5030103@libertytrek.org> In-Reply-To: <5156FAF0.5030103@libertytrek.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 2168af1b-abd9-4cf0-ad15-a3ef54968bcf X-Archives-Hash: 3455b59e90e20f9253a160a45600e4c3 Tanstaafl wrote: > I should have added that this is for a server (not hardened), so I > don't care about hot plug this or that, I just care about stability > and reliability with respect to updates not breaking booting > capability... > > As far as I know, it is actively maintained. Do I see the people banging hammers, no. lol I did have a update on eudev tho: Sun Feb 10 20:07:23 2013 >>> sys-fs/eudev-1_beta2-r2 merge time: 55 seconds. This is from the changelog for eudev: 10 Mar 2013; Anthony G. Basile eudev-9999.ebuild: Remove hacky export ac_cv_path_GPERF=true since the check is merged upstream 10 Mar 2013; Anthony G. Basile eudev-9999.ebuild: Depend on gperf only if USE=keymap, bug #452760 20 Feb 2013; Anthony G. Basile files/40-gentoo.rules: Sync 40-gentoo.rules with sys-fs/udev, bug #457868 *eudev-1_beta2-r2 (10 Feb 2013) 10 Feb 2013; Anthony G. Basile +eudev-1_beta2-r2.ebuild, -eudev-1_beta2-r1.ebuild: Rev bump to push out root fix, bug #456384 09 Feb 2013; Luca Barbato eudev-1_beta2-r1.ebuild, eudev-9999.ebuild, +files/eudev-hwdb-offset-root.patch: Update eudev ebuilds to support ROOT properly It seems the latest change was March 10 which was not long ago. As I mentioned earlier, I have plugged in USB sticks, cameras, printers and such pretty regular. The eudev fork has worked fine for me. Servers seem to worry less about *new stuff* since they usually run with what they have at boot time anyway. Heck, mdev may would work fine for you too. It seems based on reading the -dev list that udev is about to introduce some more changes. I'm hoping those don't affect me either. I just noticed that someone else on this list has ran into the news message for it too and has questions already. Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!