busybox/mdev as a possible alternative to udev?
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org> wrote:
> *There's another thread for complaining about the brokenness of the
> proposed udev implementation. *This one is for doing something about it.
> After reading the udev-complaints thread, I joined the busybox list, and
> asked if busybox's simple mdev feature could replace udev. *See thread
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.busybox/35018
>
> *Apparently it can be done for "simple" systems, but there may be
> problems for some of the more complex setups. *Then again, these more
> complex systems are the ones that would probably require /usr on the
> same partition as /, in the first place (or else initramfs). *See
> message http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.busybox/35028 for details.
> In addition to the "mdev" flag, I would recommend the "static" flag on
> principle, especially if /usr is a separate partition.
>
> *If we ever do get this working on a large scale, we may need to ask
> the Gentoo developers for a "virtual/udev" ebuild, which could be
> satisfied by busybox with the "mdev" flag, just like "virtual/mta" can
> be satisfied by ssmtp with the "mta" flag. *This would allow people to
> choose whether they want udev or mdev.
>
> *We should keep the discussion on this mailing list. *Asking once if
> it's possible is one thing. *Flooding the busybox list with Gentoo-
> specific questions would probably not be appreciated.
It does look like there will be some problems with Xorg and detecting
input devices. I spent a few minuted digging around...and I have no
leads on where Xorg ties into udev or hotplug. Heading to sleep for
the night. This is getting interesting, though.
--
:wq
|
