Ken Moffat wrote: > On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 11:19:13AM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote: >> Ken Moffat wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 09:26:42AM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote: >>>> I don't share your optimism that upstream will accept this, >>>> although I hope I'm wrong. For the moment, 182 is good enough. >> I've been watching the mailing lists and William Hubbs has been trying >> to get a set of patches into systemd for several days. He is being >> ignored by upstream AFAICT. They have seemed quite arrogant about it in >> the past when they have commented. >> >> I don't know how long -182 will stay sufficient. It's possible it could >> be years. In any case we will need to patch systemd to add back >> capabilities that they have removed if/when we do trasnsition. My >> inclination is to use a build script or a Makefile bypassing the >> autotools completely if we decide to extract udev from systemd. It's >> faster, more straight forward and we don't really need to worry about >> supporting the BSDs, AIX, s390, etc.
> I think that the version of udev-config I uploaded has everything > which was recently removed, so it ought to work with your approach - > unless you drop a separate udev-config. I think we can keep that on the back burner until we feel the need to update. -182 seems to work fine. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
