On 9/14/23, Alex Boag-Munroe <ni...@qap.la> wrote: > On Thu, 14 Sept 2023 at 17:50, Eddie Chapman <ed...@ehuk.net> wrote: >> > <snipped rant about choice and being told what to do> > > No one is telling anyone not to use it. The question has been asked "why use > it" > to ascertain reasons for keeping it in ::gentoo. Something not being in > ::gentoo isn't a decree to not use it, it's a statement that it's a > pain to keep maintained > in portage for an entire user base. > > If it was simply ordering/bullying people into not using it, the > advice to form a repo or > talk to guru or simply keep it in your own overlay wouldn't have been > given. > > There's a huge difference between "suitable for a niche use case" and > "suitable > for the entire Gentoo user base should they wish to make use of it". The > latter > is where eudev had deteriorated for some time, again this current libgudev > issue > being the latest example rather than the only one. > > -- > Ninpo > >
Gentoo is about choice, and we should keep it that way. If we start removing packages like this, gentoo will become source-based arch. What is the problem here? It's not like someone who doesn't know what they are doing can install eudev by mistake. One has to explicitly chose to use eudev. So what is the problem with keeping the package in ::gentoo. Mask it if you must, like opentmpfiles, but don't remove it.
