On Sun, Aug 22, 2021 at 3:32 PM <k...@aspodata.se> wrote: [...] > I'll be looking into that, but on some level, why should I be forced to > go around udev. Can't programs be compiled without udev today... >
Yes, they can, if you (or someone else) write the necessary code, debug it, maintain it and keep it up to date and fix vulnerabilities and other errors that inevitably will appear, as it does with every piece of software. > Udev should be an optional deamon, utilized when the local administrator > decides to do so. Wrong: the use of udev is to be decided by the developers of the code that uses it. If you don't like it, then you write your own. The code is free and open. Udev solves a very real problem, because most modern PCs have dynamic hardware; we connect and disconnect multiple devices from it all the time, and the vast majority of users prefer it when it simply works automagically. Moreover, it *also* works with static hardware, so it hits two birds with one stone. You want developers to write code that only benefits the simplest and most boring case: a PC that never changes hardware. Any sane developer will obviously prefer to depend on udev, which solves every case and it has the most users (and therefore feedback for detecting and correcting bugs, and also to ask for new features and capabilities). > I don't want things to automatically pop up unless I say so. > Then write yourself the corresponding software, or pay someone to do it. Otherwise, complaining (while cathartic and the preferred hobby of most of the internet) is completely useless. Regards. -- Dr. Canek Peláez Valdés Profesor de Carrera Asociado C Departamento de Matemáticas Facultad de Ciencias Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
