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

Re: Bug#551140: udev preinstall script fails if kernel doesn't have inotify

A: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post
Q: Were do I find info about this thing called top-posting?
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

A: No.
Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?

On Oct 16, "Giacomo A. Catenazzi" <cate@debian.org> wrote:

> One solution is to have (like old modutils and kernel modules)
> different programs for different kernels, but this will be
As I explained tens of times, this is not a possible solution for udev.

> But the main concern is the second one: what we should require
> from (self-compiled) kernels. IMHO we should finally document
> the minimal setups for self-compiled kernel and ev. document in
> release note any additional requirements.
README.Debian of udev lists the features needed and so does preinst
if it detects that the package cannot be installed.

> PS: A /usr/doc/share/udev/NEWS.Debian.gz is a nice place
> to put additional (for udev) requirements, and careful admins
> will check it (maybe with apt-listchanges) before proceding to
> the real installation of the packages.
I do not want to burden each and every Debian user just because a few
people tought it would be smart to build kernels without inotify(2) or
signalfd(2) support.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: