Samuli Suominen wrote: > On 02/08/13 08:28, Dale wrote: >> Samuli Suominen wrote: >>> >>> Except it isn't because as already explained, eudev makes additional >>> changes on top of udev changes. >>> >>> >>> Which is true. >> >> Let's see them. I'll help you: >> >> https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=eudev&list_id=1920856 > > Help yourself instead and use correct search parameters, like below... > >>> >>>> let's see them. Based on your posts, there should be plenty of them. >>>> Funny I haven't ran into any of them yet tho. >>> >>> I'm not suprised, because the current status is so similar between >>> udev vs. eudev. Only regression that's known currently is >>> IUSE="+rule-generator" that doesn't do it's job correctly and >>> 70-persistent-net.rules it is generating can't be trusted. >> >> So still no links to any bug reports that are eudev specific huh? See >> above. > > Search bugzilla for udev-b...@gentoo.org and 90% of them apply also to > eudev. > Search bugzilla for eu...@gentoo.org and those all apply. > Search eudev github page Tickets and those all apply.
You mean like this: https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=eudev%40gentoo.org&list_id=1921198 Results: "Zarro Boogs found." No open bugs!! When I look for open bugs for a package, I look for the package name itself. That has worked for ages and my search actually did turn up one stable request where yours didn't. > >>> >>>> Here is the deal OK. Udev went in a direction I do NOT like. >>> >>> What direction is that? Everything same is in sys-fs/udev than is in >>> sys-fs/eudev, except the buggy rule-generator. >>> >>>> I CHOSE not to use it and plan to not use it. I PREFER eudev whether >>>> you like >>>> that decision or not. I also plan to use eudev as long as it >>>> serves my >>>> needs as I suspect others will as well. You can preach FUD all you >>>> want >>>> but it works here for me and as others have posted, it works fine for >>>> them. The OP asked for assistance in switching to eudev not for >>>> you to >>>> second guess their choice or to second guess anyone else who >>>> chooses to >>>> use it. >>> >>> I feel pity for you, too bad the eudev in tree causes such level of >>> ignorance. >>> >>> - Samuli >>> >>> >> >> >> Here is some FUD for you. Eudev just left beta. From the eudev >> changelog. >> >> *eudev-1.2 (01 Aug 2013) >> >> 01 Aug 2013; Ian Stakenvicius <a...@gentoo.org> +eudev-1.2.ebuild, >> -eudev-1.2_beta.ebuild: >> version bump, remove beta > > And how did they get there? > By udev maintainers forcing them to upgrade to the new keymap hwdb > which required version to be raised to up-to-par with udev-206. > > Anyway, have fun with pointless udev fork which will never be the > default. I don't care if you don't want the system up-to-par with > production level system. :-) > > - Samuli > > They got there by fixing issues and it reaching stable. That is how they got there. You don't know that and you are telling others what to use for their system? Really? Who exactly do you think you are anyway? Did someone appoint you Gentoo King or something? Here is where we will always differ, I decide on my machine what I use, NOT YOU. If I don't like a piece of software and CHOSE to use something else, you don't get a say in the matter. Got it? Eudev forked from udev, get over it. I'm not in the mood for someone shoving something down my throat. That goes for Lennart and you too. I use eudev, and I plan to do so as long as it serves my needs. The only one spreading FUD here is you. Since you are way off the mark of what the OP asked for, why not go write a blog or something. Maybe go write a blog for Lennart instead of trying to push your agenda here. The OP came here for help to switch to eudev not to hear you shove your agenda. He/she already made their choice as have others. Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!
