Matthew Burgess wrote:
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
What you have described, Matt, has been tried and has failed.
I think it's a bit too soon to be saying that it's failed. LFS has only
been using a udev-config tarball, the contents of which come from the
LFS svn repo, for a short period of time.
I didn't mean the tarball. I meant the different approaches each project
took to solving the new udev. This contention started way back when it
was first discovered hotplug was going to be dropped and LFS and CLFS
each started to try to work out the new solution. What has failed is,
not the technical methods LFS uses to use udev, but the assumption that
LFS should be leading the development and that the other projects will
follow.
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
