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

Re: Idea: Rename package `udev` to `systemd-udev`, plus new `udev` metapackage, to "preserve freedom of choice of init systems".

On 02/11/14 01:37, Martinx - ジェームズ wrote:

As I understand it, eudev is intended to provide all of udev's externally-visible functionality in an interface-compatible way, so it seems to me that whoever packages eudev should *probably* be able to declare it to be an adequate replacement for udev simply by adding "Provides: udev" to the control file. (udev is not designated 'essential', so you don't need to do the elaborate dance that was done with the new 'init' metapackage.)

(ObDisclaimer: I am not a Debian packager, so my understanding of Debian policy may be incomplete, and this isn't the best place for discussing Debian packaging anyway.)

As for mdev: you need to talk to the Debian maintainer of busybox about that, since mdev is part of the busybox upstream source package. I will note that mdev should probably *not* be marked "Provides: udev", since judging by this page on the gentoo wiki:


it *isn't* an interface-compatible drop-in replacement for udev.

Reply to: