On 2020.08.10 16:22, William Hubbs wrote: > On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 12:00:44AM -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote: > > On 8/8/2020 14:51, William Hubbs wrote: > > > All, > > > > > > I would like to propose that we switch the default udev provider > on new > > > systems from eudev to udev. > > > > > > This is not a lastrites, and it will not affect current systems > since > > > they have to migrate manually. Also, this change can be overridden > at > > > the profile level if some profile needs eudev (the last time I > checked, > > > this applies to non-glibc configurations). > > > > > > What do people think? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > William > > > > Is eudev broken in some way? If so, has a bug been filed? If not, > why not? > > > > If eudev is not broken, then why your proposed fix? > > bitrot and bus factor. > > > It works fine for new installs, having just done one myself. Seems > like we > > aught to keep it that way. I count six open bugs against eudev > right now, > > and none of them look to be critical, so I vote "no" on your > proposal unless > > there is some verifiable reason why eudev is no longer suitable to > be the > > default udev provider. > [snip] > ...because of fear of > what > the udev devs might do. That fear never came true. > [snip] > > William >
William, Never is a very long time. That promise has not been made good ... yet. -- Regards, Roy Bamford (Neddyseagoon) a member of elections gentoo-ops forum-mods arm64
pgpshyF9TLPFs.pgp
Description: PGP signature
