On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 18:38 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote: > On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:26:03AM -0700, Greg KH wrote > > What specifically is your objection to udev today? Is it doing things > > you don't like? Too big? Something else? > > Today, it requires an initramfs if /usr is not physically on /. That > is due in large part to the fact that it has been rolled into the > systemd tarball, and inherited some of systemd's code and limitations, > despite the fact that udev is still a separate binary.
This is absolutely and definitely false. Where did you hear such nonsense ? -- Stelian Ionescu a.k.a. fe[nl]ix Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur. http://common-lisp.net/project/iolib
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
