I see vdev as more of a medium/long-term solution. I'd create a
libudev-compat library that implemented the udev API, but I'd structure
vdev to expose the same information via the filesystem (so libudev-compat
would just perform the requisite filesystem queries for legacy
applications).

Jude
On Dec 28, 2014 2:56 PM, "Dima Krasner" <dima@???> wrote:

> You can't just switch to vdev, because many packages depend on libudev.
> Only udev and eudev provide it.
>
> eudev is the only realistic option right now, because it's a drop-in
> replacement. Moreover, it's the only udev alternative with feature-parity.
>
> By the way, I'm not sure whether vdev is ready for the prime time.
>
> On Thu, 25 Dec 2014 22:26:49 -0500
> "Martinx - ジェームズ" <thiagocmartinsc@???> wrote:
>
> > Guys,
> >
> > I'm wondering here about what to do with `udev`, which is `systemd` in
> > fact...
> >
> > What about this:
> >
> >
> > 1- Rename current `udev` package to `systemd-udev`;
> >
> > 2- Add `vdev`;
> >
> > 3- Add `eudev`;
> >
> > 4- Add `mdev`;
> >
> > 4- Create a new Metapackage called `udev`, that will Depends on `eudev |
> > vdev | mdev | systemd-udev`.
> >
> >
> > This will be very similar to the new `init` Metapackage on Jessie, that
> > Depends on `systemd-sysv | sysvinit-core | upstart`.
> >
> > What do you guys think?
> >
> > Also, I would like to know more about the quality of `eudev` and if it
> > worth keeping it, since `systemd` developers will remove its "netlink"
> > support (am I right)? Then, `systemd-udev` will depends on `systemd` as
> > PID1 in the future (through KDBUS, if I'm not wrong), making it very hard
> > to keep `eudev` up to date. Source:
> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-May/019657.html
> >
> > I would like to evaluate `vdev` soon as possible.
> >
> > Best!
> > Thiago
>
>
> --
> Dima Krasner <dima@???>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dng mailing list
> Dng@???
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
>
>