On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 19:34:20 +0100 Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn <chith...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Alexis Ballier schrieb: > > It would probably generate controversy indeed, but my comment was > > more to understand what is the root of the f34R of udev being > > absorbed by systemd: "it is supposedly unsupported upstream and > > might not work at some point". > > Well, as far as I can see, you are maintaining sys-fs/udev > > standalone and don't intend to drop it. Even if you did, we could > > still pkgmove it to systemd. My conclusion is that this claim of > > udev being a dead end is pure FUD. > > This claim was made by upstream, no less. And it refers to *running* > udev without systemd as opposed to building (which upstream already > made impossible). > > Here is the exact wording: > "Unless the systemd-haters prepare another > kdbus userspace until then this will effectively also mean that we > will not support non-systemd systems with udev anymore starting at > that point. Gentoo folks, this is your wakeup call." > https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-May/019657.html > > Not sure what about this is FUD. If it is kdbus, this has changed quite a bit in the past months: it's now dropped and replaced by bus1, and afaik, there is no plan to make a systemd only lib for easying usage: https://github.com/bus1/libbus1 I also fail to see how udev using a new linux ipc would make it require systemd. Quoting Lennart: "You need the userspace code to set up the bus and its policy and handle activation. That's not a trivial task. For us, that's what sytemd does in PID 1. You'd need to come up with an alternative for that." If it's just that, it's not limited to udev, but anything using kdbus/bus1, and would mean openrc/${favorite init system} will have to do the same thing anyway. But again, almost 2 years is extremely old considering all the flux that has been around kbus. Alexis.
