udev problems

Jeroen Coumans jeroen at linuxfromscratch.org
Sat May 22 03:09:15 PDT 2004

Matthew Burgess said the following on 22-05-2004 11:52:

> Actually it'll start becoming a requirement sometime during the 2.7
> kernel, but as we won't release a book based on such a beast, then yes,
> 2.8 will mandate udev.  However, I see nothing wrong in planning in
> advance to make sure we'll have no issues with it.

Yes, but that only is an argument to use it in unstable, *not* in 
testing or the next stable. Unless LFS-6.0 also plans to include the 2.8 
kernel, anyway.

>>We're producing a book, not a distro.
> I don't buy this argument at all.  udev is simply an alternative to our
> make_devices.sh script.  If you say that we can't have udev in the book,
> then you're also saying we shouldn't have make_devices.sh in the book. 
> This makes our LFS system unbootable and therefore unusable - surely
> contradicting even the most basic of LFS' goals?

Then read my argument again in full context and full citation; you 
misrepresent my words and twisting it to fit your own argument. I said:

"LFS has never been bleeding edge; it just used the latest stable 
release of a package if available. I don't see any reason to change that 
now, especially not to serve desktop use. That would be narrowing of our 
focus and target/intended audience. We're producing a book, not a distro."

The argument is about changing the focus and audience of LFS by 
including bleeding edge software.

Matthew, have you already made up your mind about it?

> Regards,
> Matt.

Jeroen Coumans

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list