Re: Outstanding /dev/.udev bugs for /run migration
Roger Leigh wrote:
> There are 19 packages still using /dev/.udev after udev transitioned
> to /run/udev. Unless there are any objections, I'd like to raise the
> severity of these bugs from important to serious, given that the /run
> migration is a release goal.
If "given that the /run migration is a release goal" were the rationale,
Am I correct in understanding that these are potentially important or
grave bugs because any code relying on /dev/.udev is simply broken
with current udev? /dev/.udev doesn't seem to exist.