For those of you not following systemd-devel mailing list, here are some responses from Lennart regarding systemd and udev split.
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [systemd-devel] [PATCH 1/5] build-sys: move common libraries to separate Makefile Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 10:31:30 +0200 From: Lennart Poettering <lenn...@poettering.net> Organization: Red Hat, Inc. To: William Hubbs <w.d.hu...@gmail.com> CC: systemd-de...@lists.freedesktop.org On Tue, 12.06.12 12:52, William Hubbs (w.d.hu...@gmail.com) wrote: heya, Sorry, not going to merge this. This patch is ugly, and I doubt you can fix it to make it less ugly. Split makefiles suck [1], and so do makefiles with even more ifdefs than we already have. Besides that it would probably be the first package where you can disable building the main component. Feel free to maintain such a patch downstream, git makes that easy. But I don't want to maintain that upstream. It makes my life harder, I'd break it all the time without noticing and so it has no place upstream. The first rule for all maintainers is only to merge stuff they themselves are willing to maintain. This is true for fringe patches, but even more on core stuff like build system changes that are essential for the whole package. My recommendation for distros who want udev without the rest of systemd is to build systemd normally and just pick the files you are interested in from "make install". (And besides that, I am pretty sure you probably want to pick at least tmpfiles in addition to udev from the build tree). Sorry, Lennart Footnotes: [1] I mean, seriously, we made the clear decision to have only a single makefile and avoid recursive make and now with splitting this stuff up you undo that half-way. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [systemd-devel] setting up to allow separate udev and systemd builds Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 11:21:58 +0200 From: Lennart Poettering <lenn...@poettering.net> Organization: Red Hat, Inc. To: Bryan Kadzban <br...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net> CC: systemd-de...@lists.freedesktop.org On Fri, 15.06.12 20:06, Bryan Kadzban (br...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net) wrote: > dbus > libcap I am quite happy with depending on these two as it makes little sense to build an OS without it, unless you go super minimal in which case sysemd/udev are not relevant. > m4 > intltool > gperf (--enable-keymap will require gperf for a udev build as well) These are only build-time deps, and hence are totally OK to have. I mean, the next thing you come up with is a patch to not require automake and use only make, just because you have a problem with dependencies? I mean, seriously. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- According to theese two replies, they aint going to make the build-sys to be able to build only udev. http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Mdev Looking at this page, mdev can work really well in LFS/BLFS environment. I suggest you replace udev with mdev in LFS, thus keeping LFS minimal enough, and put udev+systemd in BLFS if necesary. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
