On 01/08/13 19:11, Luca Barbato wrote:
On 01/08/13 17:36, Michał Górny wrote:
So esystemd and ekmod now?
You know my stance on systemd, for me it is a jumble of bad and
interesting ideas not so soundly implemented, I do not have much time or
will to play with that thing.
kmod on the other hand had a pressing issue and getting it fixed-ish
took about an evening while having Federico see around it.
lu
still, first the patch goes upstream and after upstream review and
commit to git it goes in tree
otherwise we opt to the fallback and disable udev from lvm2/cryptsetup
when USE=static is enabled (like cryptsetup upstream suggested to me)
gentoo-specific patches mangling namespace of udev, kmod, whatever
doesn't sound good at all
however working it with upstream sounds great
