On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 08:08:38PM -0500, Walter Dnes wrote: > On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 09:08:52AM -0800, Greg KH wrote > > > Again, any specific pointer to a commit in the tree that caused this? > > See http://wiki.gentoo.org/index.php?title=Udev/upgrade&redirect=no > Comments?
As I don't know who made those wiki changes, I don't know, but this seems to be a choice made by the gentoo udev maintainers, not necessarily the upstream developer's choice. Do you see any problems when running udev in such a situation that points at being a udev package, or udev upstream problem? > > Since this version udev depends on files in /usr. If you have /usr > > on a separate partition, you must boot your system with an initramfs > > which pre-mounts /usr. > > I understand that one option being considered is patching the build to > not depend on files in /usr. Showing my age here, I remember when IBM > patched Windows 3.1 on-the-fly, to make it a DPMI client of OS/2. MS > released Windows 3.11, which vas very slightly different, and the patch > broke. IBM had to rush out a new patch. Binary patching is worlds different from source/build script patching. Those of us who have been doing this for a while can handle source patching quite easily. > Given how cavalierly Kay & Lennart broke firmware driver loading, Wait, no, first off, Lennart had nothing to do with this, and secondly, it was a kernel change that caused this to happen. Thirdly, it's fixed now, see my previous comments about this. Oh, also, did this affect your systems? Again, it was only for one type of device that was not used by a lot of people. That dead horse is long gone, please stop flogging it. greg k-h
