On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Tanstaafl <tansta...@libertytrek.org> wrote: > Imnsho, since it is a KERNEL thingie, it should have been maintained as a > totally separate package, or just admit the long term goal and be done with > it.
Well, that would require somebody to actually do the work. Just about everybody involved in contributing to udev supports the change. There is of course eudev which is more-or-less what you're already looking for. The only issues with that are the name isn't "udev" and any projects that vertically integrate might not work with it (Gnome, etc). > Now I'd really, really, REALLY like to hear what Linus thinks about > systemd/udev NOW. The only things I can find from him are 4 or so years old. > I can't imagine that stuff like this doesn't irk him too... > > Would someone who stands a chance at getting a response out of him *please* > ping him for an opinion on this stuff? Blog or LKML post would be fine... Honestly, there is no shortage of people offering their opinions. What there is a shortage of is people actually doing work to make (e)udev do anything differently. In the end people can complain as much as they want, but unless they fork over effort or dollars or something they won't get terribly far. That's why Mint/Mate/etc are all so popular these days - somebody took the time to fork. In the case of eudev there really isn't enough manpower to do anything beyond tweaking the upstream releases to not use the new paths/etc. I doubt that anybody is actually adding features to eudev that aren't already in udev, which greatly reduces the likelihood of upstream packages targeting it. If it were in the kernel then Linus's opinion would carry a lot more weight (like when he basically modified the ext3/4 code over the objections of the maintainers to use ordered commits by default (it has been a while and I'm foggy on the details) - a decision that I fully support for what little that matters). Rich
