From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bruce Dubbs Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 00:14:22 +0000 Subject: Re: udev fork Message-Id: <5051255E.5040402@gmail.com> List-Id: References: <20120912174951.GA32608@glow> In-Reply-To: <20120912174951.GA32608@glow> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org Allin Cottrell wrote: > On Wed, 12 Sep 2012, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > >> Greg KH wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 03:56:33PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote: >>>> Greg KH wrote: >>>> >>>>> What dependencies? Run time? Build time? And why are dependencies >>>>> bad? Do you have no ram in your system for them? >>>> >>>> The configure scripts require packages that are not in LFS. >>> >>> Like what? Can't you add them? >> >> intltool, glib, gperf, gobject-introspection. >> >> intl needs XML::Parser. glib needs libffi and python and can use >> pcre, attr, d-bus, gamin, and gtk-doc. gobject-introspection also >> needs glib and can use cairo and gtk-doc. cairo needs libpng, glib, >> and pixman and can use fontconfig, gtk+, xorg libraries (and on and on). > > Pkg X "can use" pkg Y (where Y is something that one might or might not > want to install) is not an argument against requiring pkg X. It is for LFS. Every user builds every package from source. That's the purpose of LFS. > I'm one who thinks (on the basis of experience with home-rolled > systems), that systemd really is a smarter, faster, more comprehensible, > and more user-manageable way to get a Linux system up and running than > sysvinit plus a big mess of shell scripts. After dealing with LFS users for 10 years, my experience is different. If we were building a binary distro to distribute to users, I might agree with you, but we try to make things easy to understand. The base LFS system has about 2000 lines of shell scripts. Compare to about 150K of C code in systemd. If a script has a problem, there are typically about 5 lines in a start or stop. Plowing through all the C code is a lot more difficult. > However, I take your point about some of the systemd dependencies, > direct and indirect (even though systemd's configure script has a fair > number of useful --disable-whatever options). They have rejected patches that fix the problem. > Why intltool, for instance? Systemd has a --disable-nls option in its > configure script. But this is in fact just automake fraud; there's > really no way to disable nls (and everything it brings in, including > intltool), so far as I can tell. That's why we have a hand crafted Makefile. I don't understand why autotools are needed for a package that only has one target architecture. Our Makefile (udev, gudev, keymap, and gir) is only 674 lines. Systemd's configure.ac is 812 lines and is a lot more difficult to understand if you are not an autotools wizard. I'll also note that a complete LFS build and install for (base) udev takes about 10 seconds. Boot time for a typical base LFS system is 8 seconds. -- Bruce