4 ms·

I don't think it does. udev also now requires systemd, which means, you have no choice, but to use systemd. systemd also brings it's own dependencies. But tha

by zobzu 14y ago

I don't think it does. udev also now requires systemd, which means, you have no choice, but to use systemd. systemd also brings it's own dependencies. But that's just conveniently omitted from such explanation posts.

kelnos 14y ago
Not quite true. The systemd source tree supports building (and using) udev standalone, without systemd. The disturbing part is that Lennart Poettering has stated that he's not happy with that state of affairs and would be happier if they were more tightly coupled.
- steevdave 14y ago
  While udev can be built from the systemd sources, it still requires building dependencies that are NOT needed by udev. This was silly and even though a patch was created specifically to address this, it was nak'd by the systemd developers. Disclaimer: I've been a Gentoo developer for about 7 years now. I'm not directly working on the fork but I am testing and throwing in suggestions for using it on ARM devices where it doesn't make sense to have everything systemd provides, but the devices are more powerful and busybox's mdev is underkill.
  - cmccabe 14y ago
    While udev can be built from the systemd sources, it still requires building dependencies that are NOT needed by udev. So patch the Makefile.in. Maintaining one patch requires a fork? I am testing and throwing in suggestions for using it on ARM devices where it doesn't make sense to have everything systemd provides, but the devices are more powerful and busybox's mdev is underkill. Yep, when I use an embedded ARM device, I definitely want a sluggish sysV init boot process. And a crusty old standalone udev with brittle hacks to handle sleep, suspend, and other power-related state transitions. Because, you know, it's not x86.
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
  - mseepgood 14y ago
    > it still requires building dependencies that are NOT needed by udev No, it doesn't: make systemd-udevd
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

by zobzu 14y ago

kelnos 14y ago

Not quite true. The systemd source tree supports building (and using) udev standalone, without systemd. The disturbing part is that Lennart Poettering has stated that he's not happy with that state of affairs and would be happier if they were more tightly coupled.

steevdave 14y ago
While udev can be built from the systemd sources, it still requires building dependencies that are NOT needed by udev. This was silly and even though a patch was created specifically to address this, it was nak'd by the systemd developers. Disclaimer: I've been a Gentoo developer for about 7 years now. I'm not directly working on the fork but I am testing and throwing in suggestions for using it on ARM devices where it doesn't make sense to have everything systemd provides, but the devices are more powerful and busybox's mdev is underkill.
- cmccabe 14y ago
  While udev can be built from the systemd sources, it still requires building dependencies that are NOT needed by udev. So patch the Makefile.in. Maintaining one patch requires a fork? I am testing and throwing in suggestions for using it on ARM devices where it doesn't make sense to have everything systemd provides, but the devices are more powerful and busybox's mdev is underkill. Yep, when I use an embedded ARM device, I definitely want a sluggish sysV init boot process. And a crusty old standalone udev with brittle hacks to handle sleep, suspend, and other power-related state transitions. Because, you know, it's not x86.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
- mseepgood 14y ago
  > it still requires building dependencies that are NOT needed by udev No, it doesn't: make systemd-udevd

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]