On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Tom Gundersen <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi guys, > > I have been following this thread, and I wonder if someone could > explain to me what is the real reason for wanting a replacement for > udev?
Its big and bloaty and its a good thing to have more than one implementation? > /usr: this is not a problem with udev, but rather with third party > programs. Udev works perfectly fine with a separately /usr, but plenty > of third party programs (that install udev rules files) will fail. For > more info see: > <http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken>. ugh... what a mess... Its a good thing nobody invented a boot system that depends on things that was designed for desktop and not boot systems, things like DBUS... oh wait... Btw, the article claims: "There is no way to reliably bring up a modern system with an empty /usr. " Sure its possible. The process is traditionally called bootstrapping and is not a new problem[1]. 1. bring up the disk devices 2. mount /usr 3. bring up the rest of the system Make sure that everything needed for step #1 is available in / -- Natanael Copa [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bootstrapping _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
