Getting new udev to run with 2.6.28

Getting new udev to run with 2.6.28

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

N900 has real problems on 3.19, and 2.6.28 should be very well
debugged version. Getting it to compile on recent distribution was
fun, but I succeeded. Unfortunately, Debian 7's udev does not work
with 2.6.28...

Does anyone have kernel patches to enable modern udev?

Thanks,
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Getting new udev to run with 2.6.28

[Greg KH]

On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 06:39:20PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> N900 has real problems on 3.19, and 2.6.28 should be very well
> debugged version. Getting it to compile on recent distribution was
> fun, but I succeeded. Unfortunately, Debian 7's udev does not work
> with 2.6.28...
> 
> Does anyone have kernel patches to enable modern udev?

Yes, 3.18, please use that instead.

Seriously, lots of things have changed, if you want to run a "new"
version of udev with an old kernel, try eudev, they have been attempting
to keep "legacy" support around in it, don't know how well it has been
working though, you really are on your own.

Getting new udev to run with 2.6.28

[Pavel Machek]

On Sat 2015-01-10 10:05:32, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 06:39:20PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Hi!
> > 
> > N900 has real problems on 3.19, and 2.6.28 should be very well
> > debugged version. Getting it to compile on recent distribution was
> > fun, but I succeeded. Unfortunately, Debian 7's udev does not work
> > with 2.6.28...
> > 
> > Does anyone have kernel patches to enable modern udev?
> 
> Yes, 3.18, please use that instead.

Can't, sorry. My goal is to get 3.18/3.19 working, but I really need
working kernel to debug userland (and then use that userland to debug kernel).

> Seriously, lots of things have changed, if you want to run a "new"
> version of udev with an old kernel, try eudev, they have been attempting
> to keep "legacy" support around in it, don't know how well it has been
> working though, you really are on your own.

I was hoping someone has devtmpfs patches I could just apply over
2.6.28 and get a working system?

(Alternatively, I guess I should be able to do mknod manually. But
unfortunately ALSA does not want to work when I do that... and I
really need audio and modem support.)

Thanks,

									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Getting new udev to run with 2.6.28

[Greg KH]

On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 07:09:42PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Sat 2015-01-10 10:05:32, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 06:39:20PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > Hi!
> > > 
> > > N900 has real problems on 3.19, and 2.6.28 should be very well
> > > debugged version. Getting it to compile on recent distribution was
> > > fun, but I succeeded. Unfortunately, Debian 7's udev does not work
> > > with 2.6.28...
> > > 
> > > Does anyone have kernel patches to enable modern udev?
> > 
> > Yes, 3.18, please use that instead.
> 
> Can't, sorry. My goal is to get 3.18/3.19 working, but I really need
> working kernel to debug userland (and then use that userland to debug kernel).
> 
> > Seriously, lots of things have changed, if you want to run a "new"
> > version of udev with an old kernel, try eudev, they have been attempting
> > to keep "legacy" support around in it, don't know how well it has been
> > working though, you really are on your own.
> 
> I was hoping someone has devtmpfs patches I could just apply over
> 2.6.28 and get a working system?

If you want such a crazy thing, you have all of the source to do it
yourself, good luck.

Getting new udev to run with 2.6.28

[Aaro Koskinen]

Hi,

On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 06:39:20PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> N900 has real problems on 3.19, and 2.6.28 should be very well
> debugged version. Getting it to compile on recent distribution was
> fun, but I succeeded. Unfortunately, Debian 7's udev does not work
> with 2.6.28...

I guess you will have many other issues too if you want to run
such combination (legacy kernel + modern userspace). E.g. current glibc
requires >= 2.6.32.

A.

Getting new udev to run with 2.6.28

[Sven Joachim]

On 2015-01-10 19:09 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:

> I was hoping someone has devtmpfs patches I could just apply over
> 2.6.28 and get a working system?

IIRC the udev version in Debian 7 does not require devtmpfs (that became
mandatory only in udev 176), but kernel 2.6.32 or higher is required for
other reasons.  See commit 67a77c8bf299f6264f001677becd056316ebce2f in
udev[1].

Cheers,
       Sven


1. https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/hotplug/udev.git/commit/?id=67a77c8bf299f6264f001677becd056316ebce2f

Getting new udev to run with 2.6.28

[Al Viro]

On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 09:13:35PM +0200, Aaro Koskinen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 06:39:20PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > N900 has real problems on 3.19, and 2.6.28 should be very well
> > debugged version. Getting it to compile on recent distribution was
> > fun, but I succeeded. Unfortunately, Debian 7's udev does not work
> > with 2.6.28...
> 
> I guess you will have many other issues too if you want to run
> such combination (legacy kernel + modern userspace). E.g. current glibc
> requires >= 2.6.32.

How current is current and just what does it require in 2.6.32?

Getting new udev to run with 2.6.28

[Al Viro]

On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 10:17:10AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > Yes, 3.18, please use that instead.
> > 
> > Can't, sorry. My goal is to get 3.18/3.19 working, but I really need
> > working kernel to debug userland (and then use that userland to debug kernel).
> > 
> > > Seriously, lots of things have changed, if you want to run a "new"
> > > version of udev with an old kernel, try eudev, they have been attempting
> > > to keep "legacy" support around in it, don't know how well it has been
> > > working though, you really are on your own.
> > 
> > I was hoping someone has devtmpfs patches I could just apply over
> > 2.6.28 and get a working system?
> 
> If you want such a crazy thing, you have all of the source to do it
> yourself, good luck.

... and this, boys and girls, is why quite a few of us have loathed udev
way before it got merged into even nastier shitpile.  Still do, for that
matter.

Getting new udev to run with 2.6.28

[Martin Steigerwald]

Am Samstag, 10. Januar 2015, 21:18:58 schrieb Al Viro:
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 10:17:10AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > Yes, 3.18, please use that instead.
> > > 
> > > Can't, sorry. My goal is to get 3.18/3.19 working, but I really need
> > > working kernel to debug userland (and then use that userland to debug
> > > kernel).> > 
> > > > Seriously, lots of things have changed, if you want to run a "new"
> > > > version of udev with an old kernel, try eudev, they have been
> > > > attempting
> > > > to keep "legacy" support around in it, don't know how well it has been
> > > > working though, you really are on your own.
> > > 
> > > I was hoping someone has devtmpfs patches I could just apply over
> > > 2.6.28 and get a working system?
> > 
> > If you want such a crazy thing, you have all of the source to do it
> > yourself, good luck.
> 
> ... and this, boys and girls, is why quite a few of us have loathed udev
> way before it got merged into even nastier shitpile.  Still do, for that
> matter.

You mean systemd by that?

-- 
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA  B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7

Getting new udev to run with 2.6.28

[Pavel Machek]

On Sat 2015-01-10 21:18:05, Al Viro wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 09:13:35PM +0200, Aaro Koskinen wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 06:39:20PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > N900 has real problems on 3.19, and 2.6.28 should be very well
> > > debugged version. Getting it to compile on recent distribution was
> > > fun, but I succeeded. Unfortunately, Debian 7's udev does not work
> > > with 2.6.28...
> > 
> > I guess you will have many other issues too if you want to run
> > such combination (legacy kernel + modern userspace). E.g. current glibc
> > requires >= 2.6.32.
> 
> How current is current and just what does it require in 2.6.32?

Debian 7 seems to contain

root at n900:~# ls /lib/arm-linux-gnueabi/libc
libc-2.13.so

. And that one seems to be happy with 2.6.28. Its just udev that is
the problem.

									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Getting new udev to run with 2.6.28

[Aaro Koskinen]

Hi,

On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 09:18:05PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 09:13:35PM +0200, Aaro Koskinen wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 06:39:20PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > N900 has real problems on 3.19, and 2.6.28 should be very well
> > > debugged version. Getting it to compile on recent distribution was
> > > fun, but I succeeded. Unfortunately, Debian 7's udev does not work
> > > with 2.6.28...
> > 
> > I guess you will have many other issues too if you want to run
> > such combination (legacy kernel + modern userspace). E.g. current glibc
> > requires >= 2.6.32.
> 
> How current is current and just what does it require in 2.6.32?

In glibc 2.20 the minimum kernel version was increased to 2.6.32.
Maybe this patch gives some examples what features they now expect
to be present:

	https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2014-04/msg00691.html

But looks like Debian 7 is not bleeding-edge and is using older version...

A.

Getting new udev to run with 2.6.28

[Al Viro]

On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 11:25:39PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:

> > ... and this, boys and girls, is why quite a few of us have loathed udev
> > way before it got merged into even nastier shitpile.  Still do, for that
> > matter.
> 
> You mean systemd by that?

Yes, I do.  Has it been merged into any other?

Getting new udev to run with 2.6.28

[Martin Steigerwald]

Am Samstag, 10. Januar 2015, 23:06:53 schrieb Al Viro:
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 11:25:39PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > > ... and this, boys and girls, is why quite a few of us have loathed udev
> > > way before it got merged into even nastier shitpile.  Still do, for that
> > > matter.
> > 
> > You mean systemd by that?
> 
> Yes, I do.  Has it been merged into any other?

Not that I am aware of.

I was just surprised to read such clear words about systemd from a kernel 
developer ? now I wonder why tough. I think I thought most were in support for 
it.

-- 
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA  B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7

Getting new udev to run with 2.6.28

[Pavel Machek]

On Sun 2015-01-11 10:04:26, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Am Samstag, 10. Januar 2015, 23:06:53 schrieb Al Viro:
> > On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 11:25:39PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > > > ... and this, boys and girls, is why quite a few of us have loathed udev
> > > > way before it got merged into even nastier shitpile.  Still do, for that
> > > > matter.
> > > 
> > > You mean systemd by that?
> > 
> > Yes, I do.  Has it been merged into any other?
> 
> Not that I am aware of.
> 
> I was just surprised to read such clear words about systemd from a kernel 
> developer ? now I wonder why tough. I think I thought most were in support for 
> it.

I wonder where you got that impression. Anyway, this discussion is
slightly offtopic on lkml.
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Getting new udev to run with 2.6.28

[Richard Weinberger]

On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Martin Steigerwald
<Martin@lichtvoll.de> wrote:
> Am Samstag, 10. Januar 2015, 23:06:53 schrieb Al Viro:
>> On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 11:25:39PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
>> > > ... and this, boys and girls, is why quite a few of us have loathed udev
>> > > way before it got merged into even nastier shitpile.  Still do, for that
>> > > matter.
>> >
>> > You mean systemd by that?
>>
>> Yes, I do.  Has it been merged into any other?
>
> Not that I am aware of.
>
> I was just surprised to read such clear words about systemd from a kernel
> developer ? now I wonder why tough. I think I thought most were in support for
> it.

Not at all.

-- 
Thanks,
//richard