>
> He guys,
>
> I've been at work for a week or so and today I looked at the DNG list
> for the latest activities around vdev, but there has almost been no
> activity on vdev as far as I can see. OTOH, last week I tested eudev on
> a separate partition and that seems to work quite well.

You are mistaken, there has been lots of activity around vdev and making
it installable.
>
> I think it might be a good idea to leave vdev for what it is and
> to switch to eudev. It is moreorless maintained (the latest change is
> two weeks ago) and it works well. We should not reinvent the wheel IMHO.
> And as there has been no response from the original vdev author, I think
> it's better to package eudev for Devuan and to make it available for
> Jessie and Ascii. The latest version is 3.2.

Well quite frankly you don't get to make that call. Eudev is just a
hack that from what I gather is isolating the systemd-udev changes and
bringing them in to eudev. IMHO that is less sustainable then vdev
because it relies on developers from systemd to play nice with udev and
not deprecate features that don't serve systemd's needs. At the end of
the day, I consider eudev as at best marginally better the eudev, but
still far to closely coupled with systemd to be useful in the medium to
long term.

With regards to vdev, I'm sure if Jude didn't come back, others would
pick up his work and progress it, as is happening now around packaging
it. I think it rather disingenuous of you to imply it's a dead project
whilst claiming that eudev, the re-animated zombie of systemd-udev as a
better and only option. It's not better, and it's not the only option
either.

Whilst I respect the work to package eudev and having it as an option in
Devuan, I will personally very loudly push back on any attempt to derail
alternatives such as vdev - unless those alternative are demonstrably
built on the same flawed design principles as systemd.

Daniel.



--
Daniel Reurich
Centurion Computer Technology (2005) Ltd.
021 797 722