Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 55

Thread: Gentoo Announces Eudev Project -- Its Udev Fork

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,411

    Default Gentoo Announces Eudev Project -- Its Udev Fork

    Phoronix: Gentoo Announces Eudev Project -- Its Udev Fork

    Back in mid-November I wrote about Gentoo developers looking at forking udev after being unhappy with its direction under systemd leadership. The Gentoo project has now announced eudev as their fork...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTI1NTE

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    77

    Default So, what I don't quite get ...

    they say that the devs are uninterested in providing support for [xyz]. But why the hell do you do a full fork instead of just signing yourself up to doing the areas the existing maintainers are not interested in? Just doesn't make any sense to me, but suit yourself -.-

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    528

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YoungManKlaus View Post
    they say that the devs are uninterested in providing support for [xyz]. But why the hell do you do a full fork instead of just signing yourself up to doing the areas the existing maintainers are not interested in? Just doesn't make any sense to me, but suit yourself -.-
    I don't like how this all plays out as it sounds like a bunch of kids fighting, but they have a valid reason to do this.
    Not everyone wants/can to use systemd and compatibility to other systems is a problem. Let's hope that when the waves calmed down (is this something you can say in english? I hope so :-D) both camps find a way that is working for both of them and they can work together on 1 udev.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,731

    Default

    back when udev was taken over by the systemd crowd there was a promise to keep udev independent enough for others to use it without systemd.

    That was broken.

    Do you really want to deal with people who backstabbed you in the past? who are known for their hostile maneuvering?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    594

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    back when udev was taken over by the systemd crowd there was a promise to keep udev independent enough for others to use it without systemd. -- That was broken.
    When? Because it's definetly still supported.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    77

    Default

    Ok, after reading up on the follup-thread it seems that various patches in the direction were rejected, as were bug reports (closed with "WONTFIX"). So, it seems, forking has it's valid points ... hope they can work out their differences though and merge back together (someone needs to convince Lennart first that udev without systemd also has it's use(r)s)

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,158

    Default

    I don't have anything against systemd.

    I might not know what I am talking about so correct me if I am wrong, but I have got the impression that systemd authors have tied systemd to udev so to force systemd onto everyone, I think that is very ugly and very wrong!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,738

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    I don't have anything against systemd.

    I might not know what I am talking about so correct me if I am wrong, but I have got the impression that systemd authors have tied systemd to udev so to force systemd onto everyone, I think that is very ugly and very wrong!
    An arch dev -and sysD contributor- commented that in order to fix what they wanted to achieve all they had to do was "write some trivial patches for the builtsystem". Probably the hate for Lennart and Kay played a big role in this fork.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 89c51 View Post
    An arch dev -and sysD contributor- commented that in order to fix what they wanted to achieve all they had to do was "write some trivial patches for the builtsystem". Probably the hate for Lennart and Kay played a big role in this fork.
    ISTR seeing those "trivial patches" submitted, and rejected.
    If upstream refuses to consider merging support for something that used to work, then what reason is there to expect that upstream won't break it worse?

    Also, maybe they'll be more sane about asyncronous firmware loading...I'd give it a 90% or better chance.

  10. #10

    Default

    Note from the OP (in FAQ format) that the concept of the Gentoo project announcing things is a somewhat problematic one:

    "You are a Gentoo project. What does this mean?

    Gentoo as an organization is quite similar to github, although it is exclusive to Gentoo developers. Our rules permit all Gentoo developers have the ability to start a project and such projects are entitled to be hosted on Gentoo infrastructure. This by no means constitutes official endorsement by Gentoo's governing body and we have no authority to dictate the future direction of Gentoo. We do have the ability to provide an alternative to Gentoo users, which we fully intend to do."

    (emphasis mine)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •