On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 14:09:57 +0100
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn <chith...@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Michał Górny schrieb:
> >> In a follow-up, upstream wrote about how you should only run udev together
> >> with systemd, and if you don't want to do that (spelling as in original):
> >>
> >> "we will not support the udev-on-netlink case anymore. I see three options:
> >> a) fork things, b) live with systemd, c) if hate systemd that much, but
> >> love udev so much, then implement an alternative userspace for kdbus to
> >> do initialiuzation/policy/activation."
> >> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-May/019664.html
> >>
> >> So it seems a bit more than only initialization is needed.  
> > You're missing the third option which is a sane option, and jump
> > straight to pitchforks.  
> Are you serious? The quoted line directly above your comment shows 
> clearly that I have read and understood the third option.
> > If Lennart's single statement from 2014 is a reason to use eudev
> > instead of systemd-udevd, my statement from today is a more important
> > reason not to use eudev.  
> With the exception that Lennart Poettering is the lead developer of 
> systemd/udev, while such a thing cannot be said about you and eudev.

He's lead developer of *systemd*. udev is a split part of systemd
codebase which has specific maintainers.

Best regards,
Michał Górny

Attachment: pgpMpi_G7A2Pi.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to