On 02/14/2016 09:17 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Brian Dolbec <dol...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 11:00:30 -0500 >> Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> >>> On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Patrick Lauer <patr...@gentoo.org> >>> wrote: >>>> If, for any reason, eudev should be abandoned - we can just change >>>> the virtual back. One-line change. >>> Which is precisely the corresponding argument for not switching the >>> default to eudev in the first place. >>> >> OH, my, this is looking more like you are being paid by systemd peeps... > Nobody has ever paid me to do anything involving open-source software, > systemd or otherwise. > > My point is just that there is no need to change today, because: > 1. udev works just fine today > 2. If udev doesn't work just fine in the future, we can just change > the virtual. One-line change. > > That's all. I'm not saying that there might not be other reasons to > change the virtual. > > I'm just saying that the possibility that udev might break in the > future isn't any more a reason to change the virtual than the > possibility that eudev might be abandoned in the future. > > I love it when Patrick violently agrees with me. :) > Eh yes. If we can avoid a problem we better wait until there is visible breakage so we can heroically run around like headless chickens and people see that we do something.
You're definitely of the "Fireman Sysadmin" type that doesn't want to do preventative maintenance :) Why are you so insistent on controlling something that doesn't even affect you? I mean ... the only difference for you would be that from a default stage3 you do "emerge -C eudev" instead of "emerge -C udev" and then you're on your way. As far as users are concerned, most don't care and won't see a difference, and those that care seem to be strongly in support of having eudev ...
