Thanks, I am not confused between udev and devel. Let me explain a bit more. My understanding is with the devel package, when I include in my project,
I am downloading all the header files and redistributing the code. With the non-devel runtime package (e.g. libudev1 in Ubuntu), I can avoid that. Does that clarify my question and confusion?
On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 11:17 AM, Vito Caputo <vcaputo@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 07:11:38PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 10:52:30 -0700, Sayeed hyder wrote:
> > Thanks Silvio. Unfortunately, I cannot use devel. IIUC, rhel/centos does not
> > provide a non-dev systemd package? That does not sound right.
>
> Are you mixing up the concept of an unstable version that is still under
> development, and the concept of a package containing development headers
> to be used to compile your own software? They both have the word
> "development" in, but the thing that is being developed is different.
>
I think another source of confusion in this situation is "udev"
containing the word "dev". I've only been skimming this thread as it
develops, but it seemed at times Sayeed is conflating the two to all be
development packages, perhaps not realizing udev is about *devices*.
Regards,
Vito Caputo
_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
