On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Walter Dnes <waltd...@waltdnes.org> wrote: > There's another thread for complaining about the brokenness of the > proposed udev implementation. This one is for doing something about it. > After reading the udev-complaints thread, I joined the busybox list, and > asked if busybox's simple mdev feature could replace udev. See thread > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.busybox/35018 > > Apparently it can be done for "simple" systems, but there may be > problems for some of the more complex setups. Then again, these more > complex systems are the ones that would probably require /usr on the > same partition as /, in the first place (or else initramfs). See > message http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.busybox/35028 for details. > In addition to the "mdev" flag, I would recommend the "static" flag on > principle, especially if /usr is a separate partition. > > If we ever do get this working on a large scale, we may need to ask > the Gentoo developers for a "virtual/udev" ebuild, which could be > satisfied by busybox with the "mdev" flag, just like "virtual/mta" can > be satisfied by ssmtp with the "mta" flag. This would allow people to > choose whether they want udev or mdev. > > We should keep the discussion on this mailing list. Asking once if > it's possible is one thing. Flooding the busybox list with Gentoo- > specific questions would probably not be appreciated.
It does look like there will be some problems with Xorg and detecting input devices. I spent a few minuted digging around...and I have no leads on where Xorg ties into udev or hotplug. Heading to sleep for the night. This is getting interesting, though. -- :wq
