El lun, 08-02-2016 a las 12:12 -0600, William Hubbs escribió: > As one of the maintainers of sys-fs/udev, I am very conflicted about > this. > > I tend to agree with Kent that we need to be absolutely sure before > we > switch the default that eudev will maintain feature parity with udev, > now and in the future, e.g. when a new release of udev hits, a new > release of eudev must happen asap that supports all of the features > of > the new udev. > > I also think mgorny's arguments against doing this must be > considered. > > Thanks, > > William >
I agree with mgorny on this. Specially I wonder about how fast the fixes from udev will get merged in eudev :/. That can be not a problem currently as most non-systemd users are using the splitted udev (a bit like the setup other distributions like ubuntu were using, using udev from systemd as if the default provider for udev was sys-apps/systemd even for running with openRC). But this can be more problematic when most non-systemd users will be using a forked udev based on an older version that, then, won't contain all the available bugfixes. For example, currently, if I don't misremember eudev-3.1.5 is like systemd-220 and, then, it won't include most fixes since 220 to 228. Please take care I am not blaming on eudev maintainers or something like that, it's simply that I think it's safer from a user point of view (that relies on the hardware being recognized and working properly on a first install) to ensure they get a newer/fixed version than one that can have problems to be kept on sync.
