On 09.03.2021 15:52, Jes Sorensen wrote:
On 3/9/21 6:17 AM, Tkaczyk, Mariusz wrote:
On 09.03.2021 10:45, Michael Fritscher wrote:
Am 09.03.21 um 10:13 schrieb Wols Lists:
Is udev part of systemd? Are there alternate implementations for the
anti-systemd-holdouts? Iirc you don't need systemd itself to have udev,
but it might provoke a few screams ...
My current (gentoo) system is OpenRC, but that's still on KDE4 and
hasn't been updated in a couple of years (don't ask why). My new system
is currently being built and is gentoo/systemd, but it's clear the
anti-systemd sentiment is still strong ...
Cheers,
Wol
Good day,
there is e.g. eudev ( https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Eudev ) with
the explicit target to be used without systemd.
It is a udev replacement and offers similar functionality.
I'm wondering on configuration without udev (systemd or other forks).
Is it still a case?
This is my main concern, small embedded devices that don't use systemd.
I've never been a big systemd fan, but it's how the chips have fallen,
so I am not overly worried about a couple of fanatics.
If eudev can do the trick, that would be great.
Cheers,
Jes
Hello,
Mdadm is in use in openwrt without udev (thanks to Artur for research).
They are using hotplug scripts:
https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/base-system/hotplug#coldplug
To provide compatibility with libudev dependency they wrote small shim:
https://openwrt.org/packages/pkgdata/libudev-fbsd
Unfortunately, not all libudev functions are defined, mdadm compilation
there might be problematic:
https://openwrt.org/packages/pkgdata_lede17_1/mdadm
Now, it makes sense to define libudev as optional dependency.
It should be done before new release, Intel will do that.
Anyway, I still think that we should drop udev detection from mdadm.
I there is no systemd-udevd, we should expect other tool to provide
similar functionality, like hotplug scripts, eudev.
IMO mdadm doesn't need to create any link.
Mariusz
