Mark Knecht wrote: > On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 7:48 AM, Dale <rdalek1...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Mark Knecht wrote: >>> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 4:19 AM, Dale <rdalek1...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Howdy, >>>> >>>> I noticed eudev has hit the tree. Has anyone used it yet? If so, any >>>> issues? Did you just uninstall udev and install eudev in one step or >>>> some other way? >>>> >>>> I'm thinking of switching and getting rid of the init thingy but curious >>>> as to what others may have ran into. >>>> >>>> Thanks much. >>>> >>>> Dale >>> Even if someone has, and clearly _someone_ out there has or it likely >>> wouldn't even be visible yet, but even if 10 or 20 people have, and >>> even if all of their results are fine because they are high skill set >>> folks, why would that change how you are running your machines? >>> >>> I suspect this is about your (and my) dislike for dealing with initrd >>> on a box at home. Gentoo doesn't make it at all easy so we're in that >>> together. However so what if someone has used it? Let it get used for >>> 6 months. Let it go stable. Why bother with a piece of software that >>> won't really improve your life now that you do have your 'init >>> thingy'? >>> >>> Just my view, >>> Mark >> Well, it appears that one version is stable: >> >> root@fireball / # equery list -p eudev >> * Searching for eudev ... >> [-P-] [ ] sys-fs/eudev-0:0 >> [-P-] [ ~] sys-fs/eudev-1_beta1-r1:0 >> [-P-] [ -] sys-fs/eudev-9999:0 >> root@fireball / # >> >> The first one is not keyworded or masked. >> >> You are right, I don't like the init fix because when I used Mandrake, >> it caused me all sorts of problems. That and the upgrade process for >> Mandrake is the reason I switched to Gentoo. If eudev is ready, then so >> am I. >> >> Dale > Well, OK, so if you want to call version 0.0 stable then I guess that > meets the rules of portage anyway. However version '0.0' doesn't sound > like anything that's seen the light of day, been used by lots of > people and proven robust and stable. At least to me it sounds like a > place holder... > > This is just my view, but it goes something like this: > > 1) Unless someone tells me why a really new package helps me then I go > slow, most especially if it could have a large impact like a new > version of udev might. > > 2) Somewhere in the install guide, or elsewhere, I don't remember, it > says something like 'don't expect ~packages to work correctly. We do > what we can to check them but you should expect things to break'. And > then most importantly, again from memory and paraphrased 'If you don't > know how to fix things when they do break don't use ~packages'. I let > these few sentences guide a lot of my Gentoo maintenance here at home. > I mask packages (good info from Bruce about which to mask) and wait > for the heavy lifters to shake things out a bit before I update things > that might take more than 5 minutes to fix. > > Again, all my systems are stable with ~amd64 only when required to get > an app, but that's just me. > > Good luck with whatever path you take. > > Cheers, > Mark > >
That's all true, hence my question. I'm not sure I want to use the very first version so I thought it worth asking first. Since it is a fork, one could think it would be safe enough but then again, it is the very first one. It is stable according to that but is it really? That is why I asked. It seems no one has used it yet tho since no one has fessed up to installing it, other than testers and such I guess. ;-) Guess I'll wait a bit and see what else changes. Current udev is working for the moment at least. I do plan to abandon udev as soon as I think it is safe tho. Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!
