On 17 December 2014 at 00:37, Go Linux <golinux@???> wrote:

On Tue, 12/16/14, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <enrico.weigelt@???> wrote:

Subject: Re: [Dng] system scriptinng language.
To: dng@???
Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2014, 2:37 PM

What would you suggest as udev replacement ?

--------------------------------------------

The workings of udev are a mystery to me. But this option was posted on the modular-debian list. Have no idea whether it would be useful. Just providing information.

http://www.freelists.org/post/modular-debian/Announcing-vdev





Vdev sounds really interesting. One of the main goals is that, it wants to be portable across the *nix universe, which is very good for freedom of choice. I will definitely try and see how it performs.


With respect to the ingenuity and determination of the author, something like vdev is not really something that I expect to succeed, nor would I particularly recommend that others use it. What he (assuming male with the name of Jude) is trying to do is commendable, but ultimately self-defeating because:


1) The license is GPLv3, which I would not touch with a 50 foot pole, neither will anyone else, BSD or otherwise. No one is going to port it under those conditions.
2) It is dependent on his personal projects.

3) It is using fuse, which can be quirky.

4) By using libstdc++ and STL that means that he is using C++. I have nothing against C++, but it is not usually used for system development outside of Windows. Why? Because C++ requires the compiler to use name mangling, which has never been standardized. This means that everything linked against or uses vdev has to maintain the same ABI as the version of vdev you happen to be using. Should you change anything you end up with unpredictable behavior. You would have to update everything all at once, ala Windows-like updates.



So thanks, but no thanks. I have a couple of other reasons, I wouldn’t use this, but I don’t really have time right now to go over them.