dear Jaret,

thanks for your information

On Tue, 05 May 2015, Jaret Cantu wrote:

> eudev continues to pull in relevant udev changes from the systemd
> tree (without the init-specific filth, obviously) and even provides
> some fixes of its own. It is like a window into some magical world
> where udev development continues under the old banner. Well, a
> similar banner that is one character wider, at least.

if this is true, then eudev is a really good candidate for us to
substitute udev and we should at least package it to see how it works,
while still waiting for vdev to get to a stable state.

I was never a fan of udev all the way and think that Jude's approach at
redesigning is way better, yet eudev now is likely to be more stable if
the above is true. I'm particularly interested by the fact they are
backporting the updates in udev and even fixing some of them.

can you provide examples in which this happened?

just in case you have time, for us to better evaluate the option

> The only difference I've really noticed with the last version of
> udev before being cannibalized and eudev is that eudev doesn't build
> against some old (pre-3.0) kernel headers. That's really only an
> issue for crufty embedded targets, not desktops, tho'.

well, there are a few of those, NAS and mediaplayers, that are actually
widely distributed on the consumer market. Anyway I doubt they will
upgrade anything to the point they'll ever need to defend themselves
from the systemd avalanche.

ciao