Hi TJ, I totally agree. I'm creating vdev to be a replacement for udev in the long term, but it will need a *lot* of testing before I'm comfortable recommending it as the default device manager in *any* distribution.
That said, I hope to have an alpha package in a few days. It will be able to run side-by-side with udev/eudev/mdev/static dev. Jude On Dec 29, 2014 3:10 PM, "T.J. Duchene" <t.j.duch...@gmail.com> wrote: > If I might offer my two cents, I'm afraid that I must agree. Don't get me > wrong, the vdev proposal is quite interesting, but for the first release, I > believe the best route is to stick with building udev apart from the > systemd source tree. To do it any other way will probably cause software > issues that we do not presently have the developer resources to solve - > especially if we are already going to be busy trying to compile or provide > metadata for all the packages in Debian Jesse. > > On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 2:05 AM, dima <d...@dimakrasner.com> wrote: > >> >> You can't just switch to vdev, because many packages depend on libudev. >> Only udev and eudev provide it. >> >> eudev is the only realistic option right now, because it's a drop-in >> replacement. Moreover, it's the only udev alternative with feature-parity. >> >> By the way, I'm not sure whether vdev is ready for the prime time. >> >> On Thu, 25 Dec 2014 22:26:49 -0500 >> "Martinx - ジェームズ" <thiagocmarti...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Guys, >> > >> > I'm wondering here about what to do with `udev`, which is `systemd` in >> > fact... >> > >> > What about this: >> > >> > >> > 1- Rename current `udev` package to `systemd-udev`; >> > >> > 2- Add `vdev`; >> > >> > 3- Add `eudev`; >> > >> > 4- Add `mdev`; >> > >> > 4- Create a new Metapackage called `udev`, that will Depends on `eudev | >> > vdev | mdev | systemd-udev`. >> > >> > >> > This will be very similar to the new `init` Metapackage on Jessie, that >> > Depends on `systemd-sysv | sysvinit-core | upstart`. >> > >> > What do you guys think? >> > >> > Also, I would like to know more about the quality of `eudev` and if it >> > worth keeping it, since `systemd` developers will remove its "netlink" >> > support (am I right)? Then, `systemd-udev` will depends on `systemd` as >> > PID1 in the future (through KDBUS, if I'm not wrong), making it very >> hard >> > to keep `eudev` up to date. Source: >> > >> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-May/019657.html >> > >> > I would like to evaluate `vdev` soon as possible. >> > >> > Best! >> > Thiago >> >> >> -- >> Dima Krasner <d...@dimakrasner.com> >> _______________________________________________ >> Dng mailing list >> Dng@lists.dyne.org >> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Dng mailing list > Dng@lists.dyne.org > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng > >
_______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
