Thanks, I am not confused between udev and devel. Let me explain a bit more. My understanding is with the devel package, when I include in my project, I am downloading all the header files and redistributing the code. With the non-devel runtime package (e.g. libudev1 in Ubuntu), I can avoid that. Does that clarify my question and confusion?
On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 11:17 AM, Vito Caputo <vcap...@pengaru.com> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 07:11:38PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: > > On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 10:52:30 -0700, Sayeed hyder wrote: > > > Thanks Silvio. Unfortunately, I cannot use devel. IIUC, rhel/centos > does not > > > provide a non-dev systemd package? That does not sound right. > > > > Are you mixing up the concept of an unstable version that is still under > > development, and the concept of a package containing development headers > > to be used to compile your own software? They both have the word > > "development" in, but the thing that is being developed is different. > > > > I think another source of confusion in this situation is "udev" > containing the word "dev". I've only been skimming this thread as it > develops, but it seemed at times Sayeed is conflating the two to all be > development packages, perhaps not realizing udev is about *devices*. > > Regards, > Vito Caputo > _______________________________________________ > systemd-devel mailing list > systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel >
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
