From: Bruce Dubbs <bruce.du...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [lfs-dev] udev, eudev, mdev Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 10:43:49 -0600
> Armin K. wrote: >> On 03/04/2014 04:23 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: >>> I've been working on udev and have got it to build with the systemd-210 >>> source. The problem is that it is getting more and more intertwined >>> with the rest of systemd requiring things that don't seem to be applicable. >>> >>> For instance, >>> >>> filea.c requires a function from >>> fileb.c which requires a function from >>> filec.c. >>> >>> The problem is that filea really doesn't require anything from filec, >>> but the build process doesn't like unresolved references. >>> >>> My question is whether we need to try either eudev or mdev. Does anyone >>> have any experience with eudev or mdev? >>> >>> I note that the latest eudev is dated today. >>> >>> http://dev.gentoo.org/~blueness/eudev/ > >> eudev is rather the udev from pre-systemd merge with all the latest >> fixes pulled from systemd tree. >> >> Note sure, but I think mdev is something else and not really compatible >> with original udev. eudev seems to be the best solution for (B)LFS. > > One difference that jumped out at me was that systemd's libudev is 1.4.0 > and eudev's version is 1.3.0. I don't know how much that changes things. > > eudev wants gperf and gtk-doc. We could add gperf to LFS and probably > do away with both gperf and the gudev build in BLFS. gtk-doc needs > several other prerequisites and is not a candidate for LFS, but I don't > think that's needed. On clfs we used eudev 1.3 but nieghter gperf nor gtk-doc are installed. Regards Pierre > > -- Bruce > > > -- > http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev > FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ > Unsubscribe: See the above information page -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
