On Friday 15 May 2009 22:51:41 Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > Alan McKinnon wrote: > > On Friday 15 May 2009 22:38:30 Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > >> pk wrote: > >>> Alan McKinnon wrote: > >>>> DeviceKit isn't even in portage yet and not many packages support it. > >>>> I don't even know if the devs will change and improve the configs > >>>> much, if at all. The problem with hal is that it's code base is a > >>>> mess, and it's design is a mish- mash of stuff throwwn together. At > >>>> least, that's what the lead hal dev says > >>> > >>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/DeviceKit#Dependencies > >>> > >>> I haven't looked into this in any depth but it seems like Devicekit > >>> will not be an improvement (looks like it brings in the "kitchen sink" > >>> in dependencies - I'm also "allergic" to gnome)... > >> > >> I don't see how it depends on Gnome. In any case, it's not obvious to > >> me from either the link you posted nor from DeviceKit's homepage. > > > > The only useful app using DeviceKit at this point depends on gnome. > > > > So to get DeviceKit to do anything at all, you need gnome. This is due to > > current circumstance, not design. > > Then I suppose everyone else will switch to DeviceKit at some point? If > it's better than HAL then why criticize DeviceKit at all? Isn't this > what we want, getting away from HAL?
I'm not sure who's criticizing DeviceKit, but it isn't me :-) Fedora seems serious about DeviceKit, and have learned from the mistakes they made with hal. I've heard rumours that F11 will ship with DeviceKit, but at this early stage very few apps use it of course. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
