On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 04:23:27PM +0200, David Baron wrote: > Why? I have been running without udev without problems and for the few things > that need a directory to place a udev rule, I simply create the directory > when an error messages complains about this. So ... the rule is there and I > do not use it. Interesting. I had always sort of assumed you *need* udev and can't really get by without it. Of course, in retrospect, this is silly as you can create static /dev/foo. > > Maybe it is time to go to udev, it does work fine on some distro-images I have > booted or run in qemu, but postings here complain of too many problems :-) I think its a matter of only hearing from those who have problems. I personally have had exactly zero problems with udev but that's of course anecdotal evidence and shouldn't significantly sway your opinion... I suspect that for the vast majority of people, its no problem at all. And you can likely still operate without it. As a guess, you could probably see what it does for linux sound base and then duplicate it with static /dev entries and then shut udev down and leave it that way. A
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature