Using Udev Without Systemd Is Going To Become Harder

[Guest]

What a lot of inaccurate information in one post. I don't agree with some of the systemd developers have replied ("removing is ok" and the "being quick is good"). However, some systemd developers have disagreed and it seems it has not been merged.

Regarding no rational reason for merging udev: There was, it now uses the same build infrastructure and allows udev to use various common functions.

Regarding Linux always being about choice: It has never been about choice. You have the ability to tinker (GPL). Choice in itself? I prefer something which works.

What a lot of innacurate responses to things I never actually said or meant. With that out of the way:

>I don't agree with some of the systemd developers have replied ("removing is ok" and the "being quick is good"). However, some systemd developers have disagreed and it seems it has not been merged.

What exactly r u talking about? There is no context. What exactly 'has not been merged'???

> it now uses the same build infrastructure and allows udev to use various common functions.

So if my project uses cmake and openoffice uses cmake lets merge them together.
Oh wait, my project also uses gcc and c library, perhaps I should merge them all together.
That is bullshit argument, though, truthfully, I don't exactly remember what pros for merging it in were (besides the fact that systemd had funding and could throw some manpower into udev).

> Regarding Linux always being about choice: It has never been about choice. You have the ability to tinker (GPL). Choice in itself? I prefer something which works.

Lets distinguish between philosophy, implementation and legal crap, can we?
From my PoV, only common denominator in linux boxes is linux kernel.

For everything else, you have billions of permutations to choose from - like:
c library
init system
system services
various language interpreters
alternatives to GNU stuff

For example, some people disagree with GNU philosophy (myself included) and might opt to run fully featured linux desktop box without ever using GNU.
There are alternatives to everything, bash, coreutils, grep, zip/bzip, grub, readline, sysutils, screen, tar (there are probably more GNU packages that I can't think of right now, but I can easily name you at least one replacement for any of the mentioned packages and most will be syntax/usage compatible).

There is alway choice with linux (you are only limited by 'Linux' name and thus presumably use Linux kernel).

[Teho]

I don't exactly remember what pros for merging it in were (besides the fact that systemd had funding and could throw some manpower into udev).

Today, ?Init? needs to be fully hotplug-capable; udev device
management and knowledge about device lifecycles is an integral part
of systemd and not an isolated logic. Due to this, and to minimize our
administrative workload, as well as to minimize duplication of code,
and to resolve cyclic build dependencies in the core OS, we have
decided to merge the two projects.

-Source

Kay Sievers and Greg Kroah-Hartman had together written almost all of udev code and both agreed on the merger. Kay Sievers had been the udev maintainer for the past seven years and almost all developement was done by him. It wasn't a hobby project nor in need of funding as he was working on it as Novell employee. Kay Sievers is still almost the only one working on udev code in systemd. However a lot of code is nowadays shared between udev and other parts of systemd.

[Guest]

Considering how much hate he constantly gets from within Gentoo, he shows incredible restraint.

Just look how he's been referred to as cancer here.
But that's probably the kind of people you get when they have to kill time all day while compiling their operating system every week

We (gentoo community) are not haters by any stretch of the imagination.
We are used to choice.

With small change to config and one simple command we can switch from using glibc to another C library over night with little to no problem.
We are spoiled by the fact that if we wan't specific package to use pulseaudio it will use pulseaudio while also is being default for everything else.

While we often pose as snobs (average gentoo user knows more about his system than average user of other distros) and often raise compatibility questions.

And yes, we cry wolf when upstream decides to break userspace.

One calls it hate, other calls it love, if gentoo users didn't care/use systemd most of 'hate' (read 'bugreports') wouldn't exist.

Gentoo users hate on other projects too and while we have considerably lower userbase than anyone else, ammount of reported bugs is unmatched.

As an example, one 'paranoid' gentoo hardened user with pax-kernel reported nvidia driver security bug that allowed for execution of userspace defined function pointer in kernel.

Hate us or love us, gentoo users generally give back to oss comunity.

[erendorn]

I disagree. How is it easier? Say you have a section that's 20% of the poster. You want to change it. It's either 1 piece or e.g. 10. I'm pretty sure making changed to 1 is quicker. Don't have to piece those small ones together. Meaning: all those interactions add complexity and are source for potential cause for bugs.

If you have a public API people will depend on it. You're restricted in what can be changed. Sometimes you have an error in your API and there's nothing you can do to really fix it, because you're breaking API stability. Read the comments regarding openssl API. It's something that you can use and terrible. Now try and fix this.

Are you really suggesting that the world would have been better if developers statically linked ssl libraries, or even mixed their code? and that it would be easier to fix?
Hey, remember the time when the network stack was built in applications on windows, and not system wide? It sure was easier to fix the stack

[gens]

-Source

Kay Sievers and Greg Kroah-Hartman had together written almost all of udev code and both agreed on the merger. Kay Sievers had been the udev maintainer for the past seven years and almost all developement was done by him. It wasn't a hobby project nor in need of funding as he was working on it as Novell employee. Kay Sievers is still almost the only one working on udev code in systemd. However a lot of code is nowadays shared between udev and other parts of systemd.

so instead of making it that udev notifies the init (like the kernel notifies udev) or the init watching /dev/ (inotify) they decided it's for the better to integrate it in to one of the many init systems

also note how they call it "core OS", while the linux kernel is the core of the Linux OS

and no, udev code is not shared
udev is shared
more accurately udev is in the process of being assimilated, as udev does not need anything from systemd
example http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/...abb97548b3fcf2

also if anyone is interested in how udev works check out devtmpfs and /lib/modules/`uname -r`/modules.alias
well guess Kay did do something useful with devtmpfs, even thou it is what devfs was to be when rewritten

[liam]

yes
and saying that it isn't without an argument also is

choice is in the design
almost everything in the kernel is optional (CK's BFS scheduler pushes that even further)
you can have a network without a filesystem
you can have a filesystem without the network stack

actually there is not that much in the core kernel
scheduler, mm are mandatory (for obvious reasons)
everything else, including the thousands of drivers, is optional

and the kernel will never fail because you have a different desktop environment or init system or anything
kernel will be happy if you run only one program on it and will do the same if you run a thousand programs with hundreds of users from all around the world and many users with mice and keyboards over a usb hub and multiple monitors
and you don't even need a hdd to do that as you can boot from a network or a usb stick (you can even remove it then)

so ye, the kernel is awesome
it can do anything because of the simple design

Linux is about choice. Linus' choices, in particular.
Can I run 3.14 on a proc without an MMU?
Can Linux be used in safety critical applications?
Well, yes, but only when running on a microkernel. So, no, not really.
Where did linus say that Linux is about choice?
Proving Linux is about choice souls require you to either find Linus making that claim, or showing examples of subsystemd, which work well in all cases Linus wishes to cover, and still being able to swap that subsystem out easily.
The examples you gave don't prove anything other than: Linux was designed to run in a variety of environments (but importantly not all).

[Teho]

also note how they call it "core OS", while the linux kernel is the core of the Linux OS

...core os is just a term to reference the low level userspace (most of which is covered by systemd on distributions using systemd). No one ever calls kernel the "core os".

more accurately udev is in the process of being assimilated, as udev does not need anything from systemd
example http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/...abb97548b3fcf2

You do realize that that very file uses the systemd's sd-id128 APIs?

[Awesomeness]

We (gentoo community) are not haters by any stretch of the imagination.
We are used to choice.
[?]
Hate us or love us, gentoo users generally give back to oss comunity.

You have the choice to implement an alternative userspace for kdbus andgive that back.
Seriously, instead of hating Lennart all day (as if systemd was a one-man project) while your stupid OS compiles, just help OpenBSD to write reimplementations http://www.openbsdfoundation.org/gsoc2014.html#systemd or ? if you can't program ? pick upgardening as a hobby.

[gens]

Linux is about choice. Linus' choices, in particular.
Can I run 3.14 on a proc without an MMU?
Can Linux be used in safety critical applications?
Well, yes, but only when running on a microkernel. So, no, not really.
Where did linus say that Linux is about choice?
Proving Linux is about choice souls require you to either find Linus making that claim, or showing examples of subsystemd, which work well in all cases Linus wishes to cover, and still being able to swap that subsystem out easily.
The examples you gave don't prove anything other than: Linux was designed to run in a variety of environments (but importantly not all).

what the fuck are you talking about
i am talking about diversity and configurability
you are talking about embedded and.. what ? (bdw uclinux)
it's like talking about running linux on a welding iron

safety critical ?
oh, had to google that (life critical, or just critical)
i wouldn't run anything i didn't code
and also BSD is way more stable, even thou linux has come far
if i HAD to put my life in the hands of an os, it would be... idk unix or something from hp
(bdw some companies you give your money and sometimes your life too still run netware, because it's stable)

microkernel ? do you know what a microkernel is ?
linux is a monolitic kernel (and hybrid kinda)

subsystemd ? whats that
oh subsystem

linus accepts all patches that don't break other stuff
if he was as narrow minded as someone else, linux would run only on 386

and no i'm not talking about the choice to modify the code
i am talking about the choice to run whatever you want, however you want and that it still works


if you think linux is about "my way or fuck you", then you are just wrong
give systemd a couple years and you may be right
but don't call it linux then, call it CoreOS or GnomeOS please

[doom_Oo7]

...core os is just a term to reference the low level userspace

Are you sure it isn't about Core OS ? https://coreos.com/

CoreOS is a new Linux distribution that has been rearchitected to provide features needed to run modern infrastructure stacks. The strategies and architectures that influence CoreOS allow companies like Google, Facebook and Twitter to run their services at scale with high resilience.