On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 12:22:05AM +0100, Andrew Benton wrote: > On Mon, 04 Jun 2012 00:09:11 +0100 > Ken Moffat <[email protected]> wrote: > > Just out of curiosity, why are people so keen to cling onto Udev? I > remember before udev we had to use /sbin/hotplug for things like > loading firmware and dynamically creating device nodes and it didn't > work very well. Now we can compile firmware into the kernel and the > kernel can create device nodes automagically. I was surprised how easy > it was to remove udev and I'm happier with 1 less daemon running > Although I have a lot of respect for Al Viro's opinions about this area, I like the ease of connecting to my usb printer - ISTR that before udev its address was somewhat variable, but I might well be mistaken. Also, udev is a common feature in most (GNU/)Linux distributions and I think that LFS should not diverge from the norm just for the sake of it (although, if full systemd becomes the norm, I will probably change that view:) > > > > To be honest, people using gtk{2,3} will encounter the need to build > > glib2 fairly soo after they've built xorg. It's less-used builds > > (perhaps kde) that will take longer to identify b0rken dependencies. > > But what about the issue of people who are using an LFS 7.1 system and > don't have Pkg-config installed? Should we put a note mentioning the > need for Pkg-config or just assume that everyone is using current LFS > SVN? > My gut feeling is that almost everyone needs pkg-config (a few people running servers can probably do without it). But yes, we *do* need to flag it as a requirement for people on 7.0 and 7.1. Thanks for highlighting this. Perhaps from glib2 ?
ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
