On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 5:19 PM, Oliver Neukum <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-03-02 at 10:18 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > > But why wouldn't that be a kernel option? I mean, so far the goal was > > to encode "reasonable defaults" in the kernel itself, so that > > userspace is only used when those "reasonable defaults" do not apply > > onto one local case. > > > > Really, already for compatibility reasons the kernel should just carry > > the "reasonable defaults", so that it's not necessary to match it up > > with a udev version that carries the right policy for it. > > Well, no. The kernel must carry conservative defaults that do no harm > in any case. Setting defaults sensible for the class of systems systemd > runs on is the job of udev. > What would set sensible defaults on systems which don't run systemd nor udev? -- Mantas Mikulėnas
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
