On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 09:54:49 +1100, Paul Colquhoun wrote:

> > Also, if you actually read the linked URL, it does explain it won't
> > fail to boot. You do realize these are two different issues here,
> > right? One is people saying that udev-181 will fail to boot, other is
> > the issue described on the URL linked on the news item, which is
> > about stuff in /usr breaking udev rules, which has been around for a
> > long time and will *silently* fail. I remind you that "silently fail"
> > implies that your system will still boot, even if it is affected by
> > the issue.  

> So, instead of fixing udev properly, by making the failures visible (as
> they probably should have been from the start) or even re-queueing the
> events to be run after the rule files are avaiable, the developers took
> the easy (for them) way out, and told the rest of the world to do
> things their way.

That all makes sense, although it may well be harder to implement than to
suggest. To be fair to the udev developers, we owe them nothing and they
are free to take their project in whichever direction they like and spend
their time on whatever features they choose to. If we don't like it we
can fork it. If eudev works and provides a valid alternative to udev it
will simply prove that the open source ecosystem works in a way that all
those trying to avoid "upgrading" from Windows 7 to 8 can't even dream
about.

There is really no place for the insults and name calling, udev provided
us with a great tool that we were happy to use for years, now it is
moving in a direction we don't like we can either live with the change or
do something about it. Walt chose the latter route and now the eudev guys
are following suit - eudev may not be ready for use yet but the devs have
already achieved a lot more that all the list complaint and insults ever
will.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Quantum leap: (adj.) literally, to move by the smallest amount
theoretically possible. In advertising, to move by the largest leap
imaginable (in the mind of the advertiser). There is no contradiction.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to