[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-hotplug
Subject:    Re: Trying to compile udev + libsysfs
From:       Greg KH <greg () kroah ! com>
Date:       2006-01-12 19:56:49
Message-ID: 20060112195649.GB14222 () kroah ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 01:33:20PM +0100, Wolfgang Klein wrote:
> Greg KH wrote:
> 
> 
> > 
> > Ok, that makes sense.  Problem is, it's hard to upgrade kernel versions
> > these days on distros that are not set up to handle it.  9.2 wasn't the
> > best example of a release that could handle updated kernels (to be fair,
> 
> And that's why I believe that everything related to the kernel should
> not be in the hand of the distributors. Building a distro around a
> specific kernel version that most likely will not run with a different
> kernel version later is a sick think. This is done in Redmond-OS, but it
> should not be done in Linux. A Linux-distribution should be independent
> of the kernel version.

Great, I'm glad you feel this way.  Unfortunatly we did that for about
12 years, and people complained that they wanted more features and
intregration, like other operating systems provided them.

Things like networkmanager, udev, alsa, dri/drm, and others would not be
possible without a tight tie between the kernel and userspace programs.

But I could be wrong, and would gladly accept patches to the kernel for
sysfs/udev related things, or other parts of the kernel, to make this
not so tightly bound :)

(hint, if you look at the future design path for sysfs and the driver
model, it handles keeping userspace programs from being forced to
upgrade, barring any stupid bugs in the userspace programs, which have
been the reason for having to upgrade udev in the past...)

> > that's what I use on one of my boxes, and I got it working, but it was
> > hard...)
> 
> Could you please tell me what you did to achieve a working system? Maybe
> I will be able to do the same.

from what I remember, I stripped out the libsysfs-dependant packages and
deleted udev and just used a tarball and hacked up the init scripts.

But I wouldn't recommend it for anyone, and it's not the box I do my
main kernel and udev development on, it's for other tasks for my day
job.

> > better (which makes users happier.)  In general, users do not ever
> > upgrade their kernels on their own, but rely on the disto to support
> > them.  This is the case for the SuSE 10.0 release, and almost all others
> 
> Like I told you before: if I waited for SuSE to update the kernel
> version I would still be stuck with kernel 2.6.4 or something.

No, not if you upgraded to 10.0, right?

> > Also, you don't want to use udev at all, feel free to upgrade your
> > kernel, and switch back to a static /dev.
> 
> Is there any HowTo to this or could you tell me how to do it? What would
> be the (dis)advantages? What problems could arise from that?

Sorry, I don't know where to point you here, you are on your own...

good luck.

greg k-h


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
_______________________________________________
Linux-hotplug-devel mailing list  http://linux-hotplug.sourceforge.net
Linux-hotplug-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-hotplug-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]