On 04/05/2014 07:13, Peter Stuge wrote: > Joshua Kinard wrote: >> I guess this is more of a question to be asked to the bluez developers >> why they even allow the bluez configure script to make udev optional. > > Isn't the maintainer supposed to already know?
I would hope so. The general consensus seems to be, though, that disabling udev support is non-nonsensical and you lose a lot of bluez's functionality. If that is true, why does upstream allow it? Is it because of some extremely rare corner case, or is it not as bad as thought? A look on Wikipedia notes that bluez was originally developed by Qualcomm, so I'd suspect the optional udev functionality deals with embedded devices like phones and such that don't need/support udev (i.e., Android). Your guess is as good as mine. -- Joshua Kinard Gentoo/MIPS ku...@gentoo.org 4096R/D25D95E3 2011-03-28 "The past tempts us, the present confuses us, the future frightens us. And our lives slip away, moment by moment, lost in that vast, terrible in-between." --Emperor Turhan, Centauri Republic
