Bryan Kadzban wrote: > Bruce Dubbs wrote: >> Perhaps it's because I invested so much work in the last couple of days, >> but I am leaning towards static linking of udevd and udevadm. At least >> the udev part. > > ldd /usr/bin/Xorg > linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x00007fff4455c000) > libudev.so.0 => /usr/lib64/libudev.so.0 (0x00007f3046635000) > > So statically installing libudev isn't, I think, going to fly. At > least, not for Xorg, which uses libudev to find input devices. (The > options were libudev, hal, and possibly dbus, and I don't have either > hal or dbus.) > > On the other hand, libudev.so.1 (as udev-183 creates) is *not* binary > compatible with libudev.so.0 (as udev-180 installed). ARG. Now I'll > have to rebuild X when doing this upgrade, or leave the old libudev > hanging around for a while. > > (Though you're right that neither udevadm nor udevd link against > libudev. But I think that makes sense in the case of udevd; libudev is > the library used to talk to udevd, not the library that udevd itself > would use. Not sure what's up with udevadm though.)
I generally feel that I'm behind most of the other devs because I'm at GMT-5, but I think you are at GMT-7 so you may be at more of a disadvantage. I implemented libudev.so.1 an hour or two ago. :) I did add the lib in /lib, which upstream doesn't do because they think it's too much bother to have separate /lib and /usr/lib. I think they do this because they think everyone should have an initrmfs. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
