On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 21:23:39 +0200 Thomas Sachau <to...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Michał Górny schrieb: > > Hello, all. > > > > Since nowadays udev is bundled within systemd, we start having two > > libudev providers: >=sys-apps/systemd-185 and sys-fs/udev. Making > > the long story short, I would like to introduce a virtual for > > libudev which would pull in either of those two. > > > > There are three USE flags used in conditionals when depending on > > udev: > > - gudev - for glib wrapper on udev, > > - hwdb - to pull in hwids, > > - static-libs. > > > > The former two were previously provided by 'extras' USE flag, > > and the third was unconditional. > > > > I'm attaching an example virtual/libudev which does the job. Sadly, > > because of the 'extras' compatibility it's a big ugly conditional. > > > > An alternative would be to provide separate virtual/libudev > > and virtual/libgudev; and maybe changing ebuilds not to depend on > > [hwids] but rather pull in sys-apps/hwids directly (since that's > > what the flag does). > > > > What are you thoughts? > > As discussed on IRC, there is still no consensus for installing the > udev files with systemd, which is the beginning for the block and the > virtual. So we should first sort that point out, before we even start > to think about an ebuild for an udev virtual. Do you have a technical or policy reason prohibiting me from maintaining a systemd ebuild following the upstream policies? > So for now: A clear no, i am against adding a virtual/libudev ebuild. Please give the rationale. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
