[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: removing /etc/hotplug.d/ support



On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 05:36:43PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:

> I have two comments: udev is a device node manager, not a hook
> system for generic actions to be taking when a device is plugged or
> unplugged. RUN rules kinda make this possible, but udev is on the
> right track of doing the wrong thing (i.e. too much).

Well, I have a different view: udev is a program to receive kernel
events and evaluate/execute different rules based on the event, and it
comes with a default ruleset to manage /dev nodes. hotplug is a
program to receive kernel events and has a hardcoded way to execute some
scripts based on these events.

So IMHO udev is more generic than hotplug.

> The other comment is that udev is not generally accepted. A lot of
> people still have reservations about it.

I think the reason is that udev is still under rapid development and
people are only starting to explore the flexibility it provides.

> Moreover, several setups
> cannot be migrated to udev just like that, including 2.4 kernels,

The question is will etch support 2.4 kernels out-of-the-box or not?
If it will, then it is indeed a problem; otherwise it is just to be
mentioned in the release notes.

> but also machines with devices not supporting the new kernel driver
> model (e.g. commercial drivers).

As I see many Linux distributions are starting to use udev so commercial
drivers will have to catch up in the not-so-distant future. Also, there
are some quite easy workarounds (like creating device nodes in an init
script) for most of the drivers.

> Using udev is a decision that
> affects large other parts of the system and may break it.

Yes, that's true. It has a lot of potential however that may worth some
breakage, especially since we are quite early in the release cycle.

Gabor

-- 
     ---------------------------------------------------------
     MTA SZTAKI Computer and Automation Research Institute
                Hungarian Academy of Sciences
     ---------------------------------------------------------



Reply to: