You are not logged in.

#1 2012-04-16 22:18:48

Gullible Jones
Member
Registered: 2004-12-29
Posts: 4,863

udev/systemd merger

http://lwn.net/Articles/490413/

I had a long post about this, but the forum ate it.

Suffice to say I'm not a hotshot programmer, so my opinion doesn't really count; but I have some misgivings about this. Specifically that it seems to be yet another step towards Linux-only-ness on the open source desktop, which IMO is a step in the wrong direction.

But anyway... What do you think of the code merger?

Offline

#2 2012-04-16 22:25:45

brebs
Member
Registered: 2007-04-03
Posts: 3,401

Re: udev/systemd merger

Similar Gentoo thread.

I wouldn't be surprised if e.g. Ubuntu fork udev.

Offline

#3 2012-04-16 22:39:36

Gusar
Member
Registered: 2009-08-25
Posts: 3,398

Re: udev/systemd merger

They'll still stay separate. They *need* a standalone udev, for initramfs. I'm not a fan of the everything-including-the-kitchen-sink systemd, but udev is ok. So as long as there's a standalone udev, I'm cool.

Offline

#4 2012-04-16 23:05:44

csn
Member
Registered: 2009-02-28
Posts: 10

Re: udev/systemd merger

Gullible Jones wrote:

Suffice to say I'm not a hotshot programmer, so my opinion doesn't really count; but I have some misgivings about this. Specifically that it seems to be yet another step towards Linux-only-ness on the open source desktop, which IMO is a step in the wrong direction.

IMO, there is no such thing as `Linux-only-ness' in an Open Source environment. Everything is portable on the source code level by definition, so everyone is free to copy the stuff relevant to systemd from the Linux Kernel in order to support it. Now, the BSD people, for example, have their reasons for not doing that, but that's no excuse for preventing the Linux crowd from moving in another direction.

Gullible Jones wrote:

But anyway... What do you think of the code merger?

I don't think it's all that interesting in itself. It's more or less a matter of logistics/maintainability.

Last edited by csn (2012-04-16 23:06:23)

Offline

#5 2012-04-16 23:49:53

Gullible Jones
Member
Registered: 2004-12-29
Posts: 4,863

Re: udev/systemd merger

csn wrote:

IMO, there is no such thing as `Linux-only-ness' in an Open Source environment. Everything is portable on the source code level by definition, so everyone is free to copy the stuff relevant to systemd from the Linux Kernel in order to support it.

Don't quote me on it, but I'm pretty sure that is usually much easier said than done.

(And it also entails duplication of effort.)

Offline

#6 2012-04-17 05:24:01

Gcool
Member
Registered: 2011-08-16
Posts: 1,456

Re: udev/systemd merger

Quote from the original article:

After udev is merged into the systemd tree you can still build it for usage outside of systemd systems, and we will support these builds officially.

So other than the fact that this might push the use of systemd a bit, I don't really see this as being too much of an issue. You might have to pull the full systemd tarball in order to build udev from it, but that shouldn't a big deal.


Burninate!

Offline

#7 2012-04-17 06:15:17

ngoonee
Forum Fellow
From: Between Thailand and Singapore
Registered: 2009-03-17
Posts: 6,772

Re: udev/systemd merger

Gcool wrote:

So other than the fact that this might push the use of systemd a bit, I don't really see this as being too much of an issue.

More than its already pushed by most of the 'big' distros adopting or planning to adopt it? Not sure how being in the same tarball is going to push the adoption rate any more than it currently is.


Allan-Volunteer on the (topic being discussed) mailn lists. You never get the people who matters attention on the forums.
jasonwryan-Installing Arch is a measure of your literacy. Maintaining Arch is a measure of your diligence. Contributing to Arch is a measure of your competence.
Griemak-Bleeding edge, not bleeding flat. Edge denotes falls will occur from time to time. Bring your own parachute.

Offline

#8 2012-04-17 06:34:09

Gcool
Member
Registered: 2011-08-16
Posts: 1,456

Re: udev/systemd merger

ngoonee wrote:

More than its already pushed by most of the 'big' distros adopting or planning to adopt it? Not sure how being in the same tarball is going to push the adoption rate any more than it currently is.

True. I was just trying to say that if for whatever reason someone doesn't want to make the move towards systemd; this change is not something that'll "force" them to do so.


Burninate!

Offline

#9 2012-04-17 08:00:04

Blµb
Member
Registered: 2008-02-10
Posts: 223

Re: udev/systemd merger

sad
I've removed systemd on some systems because it's just not what I want/need, and because sometimes it just doesn't behave the way it should without manual intervention... like with intel raids...

*sigh*


You know you're paranoid when you start thinking random letters while typing a password.
A good post about vim
Python has no multithreading.

Offline

#10 2012-04-17 11:45:30

Lone_Wolf
Member
From: Netherlands, Europe
Registered: 2005-10-04
Posts: 4,046

Re: udev/systemd merger

Personally i feel systemd ( and pulseaudio) don't add anything I NEED/WANT to my system.
In my opinion Linux basic philosophy has always been about : having the right tool for the job.
Both systemd and pulseaudio seem to be jack-of-all-trades types of software, and i prefer specialist tools.

Systemd seems to be replacing consolekit, now they add udev to systemd.
Guess it's time for me to search for alternatives.

Last edited by Lone_Wolf (2012-04-17 11:46:59)


Booting with apg Openrc, NOT systemd.
Automounting : not needed, i prefer pmount
Aur helpers : makepkg + my own local repo === rarely need them

Offline

#11 2012-04-17 13:56:58

ZekeSulastin
Member
Registered: 2010-09-20
Posts: 266

Re: udev/systemd merger

Well, given how it's even been copy/pasted here that udev still has a separate build target, forgive me for not entirely sharing your knee-jerk sentiments.

Also nice off-topic jab at pulse and the pointless waving of the Unix philosophy.  Wouldn't be a hate thread without it ^^

Last edited by ZekeSulastin (2012-04-17 13:57:30)

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB