On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 8:51 PM William Hubbs wrote:
> All,
>
> I would like to propose that we switch the default udev provider on new
> systems from eudev to udev.
>
> This is not a lastrites, and it will not affect current systems since
> they have to migrate manually. Also, this change can be
On 11/08/2020 15.38, Joonas Niilola wrote:
>
> On 8/11/20 11:36 AM, Jaco Kroon wrote:
>> And I've already provided you one use case where udev doesn't work well
>> but eudev does. I've also mentioned some historic issues I believe
>> should already be fixed but which did bit me in systemd-udev
On 8/11/20 11:36 AM, Jaco Kroon wrote:
> And I've already provided you one use case where udev doesn't work well
> but eudev does. I've also mentioned some historic issues I believe
> should already be fixed but which did bit me in systemd-udev which was
> never a problem in eudev.
>
Your
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi,
> As I have said earlier on the thread, we should look at udev and seee if
> it breaks things in relation to eudev. That would take some folks
> migrating their systems and reporting issues.
And I've already provided you one use case where
Ühel kenal päeval, T, 11.08.2020 kell 07:44, kirjutas Michał Górny:
> > Examples?
>
> I suppose nobody remembers the time (the previous year) where eudev
> broke reverse dependencies because of wrong version number, and it
> took
> around 3 months to get a fix (read: changing the version number)
On Mon, 2020-08-10 at 21:55 -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote:
> On 8/10/2020 11:22, William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 12:00:44AM -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote:
> > > On 8/8/2020 14:51, William Hubbs wrote:
> > > > All,
> > > >
> > > > I would like to propose that we switch the default udev
On Tue, 2020-08-11 at 10:59 +0800, Benda Xu wrote:
> Hi William,
>
> William Hubbs writes:
>
> > No one has offered to switch from eudev to udev and look at
> > regressions. People are asking me to show what features exist in udev
> > that aren't in eudev. I stuck with udev. I don't use eudev
Hi William,
William Hubbs writes:
> No one has offered to switch from eudev to udev and look at
> regressions. People are asking me to show what features exist in udev
> that aren't in eudev. I stuck with udev. I don't use eudev so I don't
> know.
I don't think imposing a personal preference
On 8/10/2020 22:08, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 9:55 PM Joshua Kinard wrote:
>>
>> On 8/10/2020 11:22, William Hubbs wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 12:00:44AM -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote:
If eudev is not broken, then why your proposed fix?
>>>
>>> bitrot and bus
On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 9:55 PM Joshua Kinard wrote:
>
> On 8/10/2020 11:22, William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 12:00:44AM -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote:
> >>
> >> If eudev is not broken, then why your proposed fix?
> >
> > bitrot and bus factor.
>
> Examples?
The sole maintainer of
On 8/10/2020 11:22, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 12:00:44AM -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote:
>> On 8/8/2020 14:51, William Hubbs wrote:
>>> All,
>>>
>>> I would like to propose that we switch the default udev provider on new
>>> systems from eudev to udev.
>>>
>>> This is not a
Hi,
To summarize
- There's no known bugs in eudev that are not in udev
- There's no bug that would be fixed by switch from eudev to udev
- There's no new feature that would change eudev to udev bring
- Currently musl and glibc profiles uses common eudev, after change we
whould have musl profile
On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 05:47:52PM +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On Sat, 8 Aug 2020 13:51:41 -0500
> William Hubbs wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > I would like to propose that we switch the default udev provider on
> > new systems from eudev to
On 2020.08.10 16:22, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 12:00:44AM -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote:
> > On 8/8/2020 14:51, William Hubbs wrote:
> > > All,
> > >
> > > I would like to propose that we switch the default udev provider
> on new
> > > systems from eudev to udev.
> > >
> > >
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Sat, 8 Aug 2020 13:51:41 -0500
William Hubbs wrote:
> All,
>
> I would like to propose that we switch the default udev provider on
> new systems from eudev to udev.
>
> This is not a lastrites, and it will not affect current systems since
>
On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 12:00:44AM -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote:
> On 8/8/2020 14:51, William Hubbs wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > I would like to propose that we switch the default udev provider on new
> > systems from eudev to udev.
> >
> > This is not a lastrites, and it will not affect current
On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 08:49:20AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 8:16 AM Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
> >
> > On 2020-08-10 14:07, Michał Górny wrote:
> > > ...or a revert of a change made for change's sake.
> >
> > That's a bold statement for an unambiguous 7-0 decision as
On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 8:16 AM Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
>
> On 2020-08-10 14:07, Michał Górny wrote:
> > ...or a revert of a change made for change's sake.
>
> That's a bold statement for an unambiguous 7-0 decision as seen in
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/575718.
As one who voted yes, my
On 2020-08-10 14:07, Michał Górny wrote:
> ...or a revert of a change made for change's sake.
That's a bold statement for an unambiguous 7-0 decision as seen in
https://bugs.gentoo.org/575718.
--
Regards,
Thomas Deutschmann / Gentoo Linux Developer
C4DD 695F A713 8F24 2AA1 5638 5849 7EE5 1D5D
On Mon, 2020-08-10 at 09:35 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > > > > > On Sun, 09 Aug 2020, William Hubbs wrote:
> > There are roughly 100 commits in the udev master branch since the date
> > of this sync:
> > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commits/master/src/udev
>
> And what does this tell
On Mon, 2020-08-10 at 13:52 +0200, Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
> On 2020-08-09 23:14, William Hubbs wrote:
> > Here is something else to consider.
> >
> > Blueness and any of the other eudev maintainers are doing good work
> > for alternative c library support such as musl. In fact, the musl
> >
On 2020-08-09 23:14, William Hubbs wrote:
> Here is something else to consider.
>
> Blueness and any of the other eudev maintainers are doing good work
> for alternative c library support such as musl. In fact, the musl
> profiles hard mask sys-fs/udev, so they are covered no matter what
>
> On Sun, 09 Aug 2020, William Hubbs wrote:
> There are roughly 100 commits in the udev master branch since the date
> of this sync:
> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commits/master/src/udev
And what does this tell us? Commit count isn't very useful as a metric.
Do these commits fix any
On 8/8/2020 14:51, William Hubbs wrote:
> All,
>
> I would like to propose that we switch the default udev provider on new
> systems from eudev to udev.
>
> This is not a lastrites, and it will not affect current systems since
> they have to migrate manually. Also, this change can be overridden
William Hubbs writes:
>> William - can you actually elaborate on WHY you want to change things?
>> Is there some problem with eudev? Is it actively maintained and
>> generally tracking upstream udev commits (minus whatever they
>> intentionally don't want to accept)?
>
> It is maintained
On Sun, Aug 09, 2020 at 01:22:44PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 09, 2020 at 06:40:07PM +0200, Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
> > On 2020-08-08 20:51, William Hubbs wrote:
> > > What do people think?
> >
> > Like others already asked: What's the reason for this?
>
> Like others have
On Sun, Aug 9, 2020 at 11:22 AM William Hubbs wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 09, 2020 at 06:40:07PM +0200, Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
> > On 2020-08-08 20:51, William Hubbs wrote:
> > > What do people think?
> >
> > Like others already asked: What's the reason for this?
>
> Like others have said on the
On Sun, Aug 09, 2020 at 06:40:07PM +0200, Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
> On 2020-08-08 20:51, William Hubbs wrote:
> > What do people think?
>
> Like others already asked: What's the reason for this?
Like others have said on the thread, the reason for the switch away
from udev in the past was
On 2020-08-08 20:51, William Hubbs wrote:
> What do people think?
Like others already asked: What's the reason for this?
What do you expect from this change?
Is there a problem when new Gentoo installations will use EUDEV by
default? Or is there a benefit if new installations would use
On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 6:57 PM William Hubbs wrote:
> Hi Rich,
>
> > William - can you actually elaborate on WHY you want to change things?
> > Is there some problem with eudev? Is it actively maintained and
> > generally tracking upstream udev commits (minus whatever they
> > intentionally
On Sat, 2020-08-08 at 21:17 +0100, Roy Bamford wrote:
> With the declared aim from upstream of making udev inseparable from
> systemd, its not something to be done lightly.
> That's the entire reason that eudev was necessary.
Really? And I've thought that the primary reason was that udev
Hi Rich,
On Sat, Aug 08, 2020 at 06:22:17PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 4:17 PM Roy Bamford wrote:
> >
> > With the declared aim from upstream of making udev inseparable from
> > systemd, its not something to be done lightly.
> > That's the entire reason that eudev was
On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 6:48 PM Roy Bamford wrote:
>
> On 2020.08.08 23:22, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 4:17 PM Roy Bamford
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > With the declared aim from upstream of making udev inseparable from
> > > systemd, its not something to be done lightly.
> > >
On 2020.08.08 23:22, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 4:17 PM Roy Bamford
> wrote:
> >
> > With the declared aim from upstream of making udev inseparable from
> > systemd, its not something to be done lightly.
> > That's the entire reason that eudev was necessary.
> >
> > I would want
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
It actually works is enough reason for me. Was forced to migrate a
> bunch of systems not six months back from systemd-udev to eudev because
> systemd-udev is absolutely terrible w.r.t. race conditions resulting in
> lockups that kept forcing us
On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 4:17 PM Roy Bamford wrote:
>
> With the declared aim from upstream of making udev inseparable from
> systemd, its not something to be done lightly.
> That's the entire reason that eudev was necessary.
>
> I would want some convincing that it was not another step on the road
On Sat, Aug 08, 2020 at 11:38:36PM +0200, Jaco Kroon wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2020/08/08 22:57, William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 08, 2020 at 09:17:20PM +0100, Roy Bamford wrote:
> >> On 2020.08.08 19:51, William Hubbs wrote:
> >>> All,
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi,
On 2020/08/08 22:57, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 08, 2020 at 09:17:20PM +0100, Roy Bamford wrote:
>> On 2020.08.08 19:51, William Hubbs wrote:
>>> All,
>>>
>>> I would like to propose that we switch the default udev provider on
>>> new
On Sat, Aug 08, 2020 at 09:17:20PM +0100, Roy Bamford wrote:
> On 2020.08.08 19:51, William Hubbs wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > I would like to propose that we switch the default udev provider on
> > new
> > systems from eudev to udev.
> >
> > This is not a lastrites, and it will not affect current
On 2020.08.08 19:51, William Hubbs wrote:
> All,
>
> I would like to propose that we switch the default udev provider on
> new
> systems from eudev to udev.
>
> This is not a lastrites, and it will not affect current systems since
> they have to migrate manually. Also, this change can be
> I would like to propose that we switch the default udev provider on new
> systems from eudev to udev.
Well... maybe you could somewhat expand on the why?
--
Andreas K. Hüttel
dilfri...@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux developer
(council, qa, toolchain, base-system, perl, libreoffice)
signature.asc
All,
I would like to propose that we switch the default udev provider on new
systems from eudev to udev.
This is not a lastrites, and it will not affect current systems since
they have to migrate manually. Also, this change can be overridden at
the profile level if some profile needs eudev (the
42 matches
Mail list logo
