Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 97

Thread: Gentoo Developers Unhappy, Fork udev

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nightmarex View Post
    Udev is a critical linux component. Systemd is quickly becoming one as well. However I have no flipping idea why udev is merged under systemd's tree in the first place. What benefit to this action am I overlooking?
    It's called 'vendor lock-in'. Merging these two projects is basically telling the community 'Use our lennartware or f**k you!'. Red Hat is a corporation, it's only natural for them to shiv competition by any means necessary, even if it's simply stupid thing to do in open source.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,764

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kaszak View Post
    It's called 'vendor lock-in'. Merging these two projects is basically telling the community 'Use our lennartware or f**k you!'. Red Hat is a corporation, it's only natural for them to shiv competition by any means necessary, even if it's simply stupid thing to do in open source.
    Bullshit. Nobody stopped or stops anyone from creating another init system (ie upstart) or fork udev or create a newer better udev. Canonocal did it, Gentoo devs did it etc. And noone -since lennartware was mentioned- created a better pulse audio. Because probably people (read neckbeards in basements) like them find a meaning in their empty life by fiddling with text files for plugging in a USB DAC or BT headset or whatever. And again noone stoped anyone from creating anything. Its fucking Open Source and you can plug pretty much anything in it.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    76

    Thumbs up

    Excellent news, the poettering madness must be stopped.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    110

    Default

    The only sad part I can see is how people talks about how only the *masked* version of udev is without support for *unmounted* /usr. That only clearly shows how little those people tend to use their MTP-devices and or udisks wth LVM/MDRAID and or alike.... I know I had troubles with udev not handling separate /usr since long before that page was written, and too bad it was written by lennard over at the systemd-freedesktop-page, because that only make the we-hate-lennart-camp mis the point of this whole trouble:

    udev has been broken with a *unmounted* /usr for many years. And noone has had the time/will to fix it. And this was long before systemd even existed.

    Now, I do not say that it is a bad thing this fork, because there are *many* other things to be desired from udev, which systemd does not seem interested in (that is why Linus really called the crazy).
    So Richard, Good luck! And maybe someday we have something that we even can have a such a minimalistic version of that it even fits genkernel without bloating, because I really would like killing a lot of our code (staring at dolvm/domdraid) in favor of having something handling on demand, something last time I checked mdev did not.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,764

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xake View Post
    The only sad part I can see is how people talks about how only the *masked* version of udev is without support for *unmounted* /usr. That only clearly shows how little those people tend to use their MTP-devices and or udisks wth LVM/MDRAID and or alike.... I know I had troubles with udev not handling separate /usr since long before that page was written, and too bad it was written by lennard over at the systemd-freedesktop-page, because that only make the we-hate-lennart-camp mis the point of this whole trouble:

    udev has been broken with a *unmounted* /usr for many years. And noone has had the time/will to fix it. And this was long before systemd even existed.

    Now, I do not say that it is a bad thing this fork, because there are *many* other things to be desired from udev, which systemd does not seem interested in (that is why Linus really called the crazy).
    So Richard, Good luck! And maybe someday we have something that we even can have a such a minimalistic version of that it even fits genkernel without bloating, because I really would like killing a lot of our code (staring at dolvm/domdraid) in favor of having something handling on demand, something last time I checked mdev did not.
    The Linus crazy comment had nothing to do with Lennart or systemd in general. He was referring to Kay and the udev maintenance.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 89c51 View Post
    The Linus crazy comment had nothing to do with Lennart or systemd in general. He was referring to Kay and the udev maintenance.
    Sorry but the neckbeard crowd already picked this up and we will see it repeated a million times.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,764

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    Sorry but the neckbeard crowd already picked this up and we will see it repeated a million times.
    Sadly the neckbeard crowd didn't pick up all the positive comments made by many top end hackers about systemd. There was even a comment by gkh describing people that want systemd to disappear as "sad people". (Gkh is probably too polite and nice to use something like blatant idiots).

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 89c51 View Post
    Sadly the neckbeard crowd didn't pick up all the positive comments made by many top end hackers about systemd. There was even a comment by gkh describing people that want systemd to disappear as "sad people". (Gkh is probably too polite and nice to use something like blatant idiots).
    Yes thats true.Even more sadly our beloved neckbeard crowd suffered from another delusion too; The failed to grasp that no one was willing to maintain udev as it was.

    Greg stopped.
    Kay is willing on the terms it goes to systemd.
    The Gentoo crowd can only do forks which is so much easier because they can merge from systemd.

    I guess that is too complicated to understand when your neckbeard is growing so large it stops blood coming to your head. It is so sad to see clear evidence of lack of manpower results in waste of man power. The only fun part we get is to watch a bunch of neckbeards go crazy on a yellow journalism forum.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 89c51 View Post
    The Linus crazy comment had nothing to do with Lennart or systemd in general. He was referring to Kay and the udev maintenance.
    His comment was about how udev was handled in general and the philosophy behind the firmware-loading specifically. However he also had a comment about how udev had been incorporated into systemd, and what impact that had on how it is maintained.
    And since Kay and Lennart was so kind to tightly integrate udev into systemd, and talk about how they will allow but not *support* an out-of-systemd usage of udev the question is if we really can separate the two as different projects anymore?

  10. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    Yes thats true.Even more sadly our beloved neckbeard crowd suffered from another delusion too; The failed to grasp that no one was willing to maintain udev as it was.

    Greg stopped.
    Kay is willing on the terms it goes to systemd.
    The Gentoo crowd can only do forks which is so much easier because they can merge from systemd.

    I guess that is too complicated to understand when your neckbeard is growing so large it stops blood coming to your head. It is so sad to see clear evidence of lack of manpower results in waste of man power. The only fun part we get is to watch a bunch of neckbeards go crazy on a yellow journalism forum.
    Redhat has 2 guys working on systemd while we have 7 on the team that is working on the udev fork. Who do you think is suffering from a lack of manpower?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •