Originally posted by finalzone
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Gentoo Announces Eudev Project -- Its Udev Fork
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by tuke81 View PostSo if I understand this right in systemd-devs pov if you wanted to use only udev you have to compile whole systemd at the same time. This would be ok binary distros like ubuntu and tho upstart, but not in source distros like gentoo. If I would want to use only udev with gentoo I don't want to compile something that are not needed, it's just a waste of time and resources of my own computer. And what Hubbs suggested with his patches is to add two configure flags that make possible to compile only udev.
anyway, that isn't really the crux of why they are forking from what i gather, just one issue (that sounds like it can already be easily resolved anyway and is already documented).
Comment
-
Originally posted by ninez View Postthat's not true though. You don't have to compile all of systemd to get udevd and friends (but unfortunately, you would still need the systemd sources, which includes things you don't need). with a few quick modifications, you can compile them independently; http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Soft.../MinimalBuilds it looks fairly simple to do, create a couple of (empty) .pc files, use PKG_CONFIG_PATH to point to them, then you can compile each component with 'make udevd' (etc).
anyway, that isn't really the crux of why they are forking from what i gather, just one issue (that sounds like it can already be easily resolved anyway and is already documented).
At this point, we have found plenty of decisions that the systemd developers made that we do not like, so the purpose of the fork has expanded beyond just patching a few things. In particular, we want to improve support for non-GNU userlands and tool chains, enforce peer review on all changes made and provide proper documentation of changes. That is in addition to fixing bugs that involve system configurations that Fedora does not use and making the build system simpler and more flexible. For the record, systemd's developers do not want any of this because their priorities differ from ours and that is okay.Last edited by ryao; 19 December 2012, 03:32 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by GreatEmerald View PostI only hope that they will maintain a good relationship with one another
Comment
-
Originally posted by ryao View PostThe two projects have orthogonal priorities. eudev favors long term compatibility as a modular component while systemd favors the single tree approach where support for older versions of components is pointless. Both have merits.
Comment
-
Originally posted by bnolsen View PostI'll take the modularity any day. I never quite understood the massive drive to shave absolutely every ms off boot time. Strangely enough since Arch switched over to systemd the new boot system actually seems slower to me. I've been having problems with systemd hanging and blowing out cpu, etc. It hasnt' been exactly been a smooth transition.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ryao View PostIt is true that you can patch the build system to build udev independently, although that is a fragile hack. The Gentoo developers maintaining udev were not willing to maintain that outside of upstream and systemd upstream was not willing to do that. You could consider things from the perspective of what systemd's developers did and what the Gentoo udev maintainers did. Many of us did not like the end result and the only way that both groups (i.e. the existing maintainers and the rest of us) could be happy was for us to fork. Honestly, the existing Gentoo udev maintainers do not like having another udev in the tree, but their unwillingness to patch systemd udev to accommodate what the rest of us wanted necessitated it.
Originally posted by ryao View PostAt this point, we have found plenty of decisions that the systemd developers made that we do not like, so the purpose of the fork has expanded beyond just patching a few things. In particular, we want to improve support for non-GNU userlands and tool chains, enforce peer review on all changes made and provide proper documentation of changes. That is in addition to fixing bugs that involve system configurations that Fedora does not use and making the build system simpler and more flexible. For the record, systemd's developers do not want any of this because their priorities differ from ours and that is okay.
anyway, best of luck with eudev - i am sure people will find it useful.
Originally posted by bnolsen View PostI'll take the modularity any day. I never quite understood the massive drive to shave absolutely every ms off boot time. Strangely enough since Arch switched over to systemd the new boot system actually seems slower to me. I've been having problems with systemd hanging and blowing out cpu, etc. It hasnt' been exactly been a smooth transition.
I know someone else whom had initial issues with startup, it turned out to be a very minor thing to fix.
Myself, i didn't run into any problems with systemd. When i was using sysv + e4rat - i thought booting was fast (vs. not using e4rat), then i ditched them both for systemd and instantly my boot time was reduced - then i optimized it a bit and shaved off another 2/3 seconds. i'm not overly concerned about boot time - but i don't mind cutting it in half, eitherLast edited by ninez; 20 December 2012, 05:57 PM.
Comment
Comment