Re: Really, about udev, not init sytsems

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de>]

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 10:52:58PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 11/25/2012 01:30 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > Why? Why would you want to rip such low-level stuff apart?
> 
> Well, isn't it the opposite thing that is happening? "Such low-level
> stuff" are being merged (with systemd+udev merge), they were
> separated projects before.
> 
> So, I'd rather ask you: why would you want "such low-level stuff"
> to merge, since some others like it separated (like for example,
> to be able to have the choice of replacing one or another)?

Well, systemd and udev are developed by the same developers. Both
daemons interact very closely and integration of the sources was the
natural consequence.

Yes, it makes it more difficult to use udev with a different init
system, but again most people don't care as long as the init system
they have works reliable. And since udev is Linux-only anyway, I don't
see a problem merging it with a Linux-only init system.

If it's so important to be able to choose such a low-level component
as the init system, why aren't people demanding that you can choose
different kernel stacks of choice? For example OSS4 instead of ALSA or
the old Firewire stack instead of the new one?

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913