On 06/19/2012 08:00 PM, Jürgen Daubert wrote:
Kay Sievers <kay <at> vrfy.org> writes:
[...]
We said udev *runs* alone, not that you can tweak the build system to
only build it. And that is still all true.
Sorry, but in your first announcement [1] this sounds quite different
to me. At all I got the impression that the whole merge is more or less
a try to force pepole to use systemd.
Heh, looks like so.
regards
Juergen
[1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.hotplug.devel/17392
I guess you are talking about this part?
*Distributions not wishing to adopt systemd can build udev pretty much
the same way as before, however should then use the systemd tarball
instead of the udev tarball and package only what is necessary of the
resulting build.*
But it looks like this one can be interpreted in two ways: Build udev
same way as before (with same deps) or build udev same way as before
(same procedure). I think most of you minimalists interpreted that as
the first one. But also, it isn't really fair not to allow user to
choose what to build. I have nothing against systemd in LFS and source
based distros. I even use it in my LFS setup, it is far more better than
the sysvinit and those bash init scripts. But if you look arround,
people will always mock about "too much dependencies" even tough those
don't use anything on todays hardware. Just let them choose wether they
want to BUILD (not RUN) systemd and do not force them in any way (and
sorry for saying this, but this behaviour looks just like you want to
force everyone to build/use systemd even if they won't), it isn't in the
spirit of Free and Open Source Software.
_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
