On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 03:41:55PM -0300, gustavo panizzo <gfa> wrote: > >udev isn't broken. > > really? > > https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=134012&p=1
I actually remember having seen this issue on Fedora Rawhide as well, but it vanished after an update a few weeks ago, so it rather seems like a "normal" bug to me. That's not really what "broken" means in this context. > but don't trust me > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/10/2/505 Well, yes, it's the same issue. Linus is well known for going on a rant very quickly, but that doesn't mean that udev is completely broken. Yes, they obviously made a recent change that broke module loading on some machines, but that doesn't mean the whole concept is broken. That's just an unfair statement. Also, Kay is admitting that there is/was a problem with udev that needs to be addressed and it seems that they did because I cannot reproduce it anymore with udev 195 anymore. Adrian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121114223427.ga23...@physik.fu-berlin.de
