Matthew Burgess wrote: > On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 05:07:25 -0500, Jeremy Huntwork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Anything else? >> > > Ticket #2284 - radical plan would be to just drop udev-config completely, > then any reported issues should be passed upstream and fixed there. I really > don't see anything special about LFS that means it should have to customise > Udev beyond upstream's default config :-) > > Regards, > > Matt. > Good idea, but I think there will always be some distro overrides needed. Look at our last change in the changelog (fdx? - detail escapes me ATM)...but when I researched it, it was brought up before on the udev list, hashed out on the udev list, and finally a change made that didn't quite match the recommendation because two distros disagreed (I forget who). The compromise was still better than the original, but we still needed to change it for our take on what was correct. Hopefully though, the overrides will be cut to a minimum.
-- DJ Lucas -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content, and is believed to be clean. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
