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 2ED9C1389F5 for ; Mon, 17 Nov 2014 10:28:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EB1DEE0EB1; Mon, 17 Nov 2014 10:27:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-la0-f41.google.com (mail-la0-f41.google.com [209.85.215.41]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82B97E0E9E for ; Mon, 17 Nov 2014 10:27:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-la0-f41.google.com with SMTP id gf13so6071606lab.14 for ; Mon, 17 Nov 2014 02:27:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=q194anZmZekJ01gTWCNzNmxosH+vvt3kb7Mu6PUM5Xw=; b=0zbIABQKYLAn2HLMlMfXyrAB2DpX39SeVR8WXEJ2euH6kXcFak67vT0sGvAb3i0wVP 1s2UTIpNO/MmAnZUHEoUsoitR0VNLSRAWbVY1zRHa5eGtW8PxJcOkE7qam4L/Dadcnuh YVaXKv1ATJ8uEfEUgNKwxTHaFm030/mrItSZDh13k+gyfPNnkpJiTEp3qmyhEfEFD0GF +PD3em2dsqh6dpQn7dYKybG2j+ugoPWtWEA7FCG6Wjb83EVBkIL6OdPlJ0jeuOtG329u Mh6BCRPVgXwFDMyGH+bzWbqLvLV3ol+LV/Zy9UhHOUquCM9Z183TjqTUInqN3bsY+zX1 Vlfg== 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 X-Received: by 10.152.116.80 with SMTP id ju16mr26244948lab.13.1416220075984; Mon, 17 Nov 2014 02:27:55 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.152.47.240 with HTTP; Mon, 17 Nov 2014 02:27:55 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20141113170803.GA13450@waltdnes.org> References: <54245C36.50507@gentoo.org> <5424F3F2.2020808@gentoo.org> <54609BD1.2000206@libertytrek.org> <5460DE61.20008@gentoo.org> <20141111052026.GA2194@waltdnes.org> <20141113170803.GA13450@waltdnes.org> Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 05:27:55 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev (viable) alternatives ? From: Tom H To: Gentoo User Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: 7566512b-9d6f-4036-baee-0f0009491649 X-Archives-Hash: e11ab8c9af28e1172da26df84e90dd10 On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Walter Dnes wrote: > On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 07:18:30AM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote >> >> Can you find one example of any situation where the linux kernel has >> ever required any specific implementation of anything in userspace as >> a matter of policy in its 23 year history? I'm sure you could find >> some examples of cases where there just happened to be one de-facto >> implementation of something, but even that might be tough with all the >> diversity in the linux world. > > It might not be an official official requirement, but if the upstream > gets rolled into systemd, then we depend on the "goodwill" of systemd > devs not to go and break anybody else's userspace implementation. > Lennart and "goodwill" do not belong in the same sentence. How's > systemd-shim working out for Debian? Do you have any reason to think that it isn't working out? The systemd-shim and cgmanager developers have to play catch up but I'm using both on Debian and Ubuntu and they're OK.