On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 03:30:09PM +0200, Tom Gundersen wrote: > For better or worse, the reality is that there are hard dependencies > on things you don't like. It seems that upstream is unwilling to > change that. Then you should really ask yourself why they take that position. AFAICS, there is no solid technical argument for it. > > Now udev has been merged with systemd, and one can wonder > > why. According to the authors, it is 'because they share > > some common code'. A rather weak argument, that would be > > true for almost any two subsystems you can imagine. > > This is a misrepresentation. Udev and systemd were merged I think > mainly because they "belong together", but also because they had > cyclic build dependencies as they are very tightly integrated. It's no misrepresantation, but an almost literal quote from one of the authors. Yes, systemd and udev are supposed to work closely together, that makes perfect sense. The solution preferred by grown-up programmers in such cases is to define stable interfaces on both sides allowing them to do that, not to merge them. Ciao, -- FA A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia. It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
