Hotplug patches from Debian

Ken Moffat ken at
Fri Jun 4 04:51:31 PDT 2004

On Fri, 4 Jun 2004, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:

> I have examined patches contained in the Debian source package
> "hotplug_0.0.20040329-8". Note that we use hotplug-20040401. Results:
> SUMMARY: I have to add two more hotplug patches to the patches projects
> and probably add them and the "overcurrent" patch to the book. Also we
> need to decide what to do with network interface hotplug. Together with
> our custom initscript, there will be 8 (eight!) LFS-related changes to
> this package. It's probably too much for a single package, isn't it?
> Even OpenOffice has less patches!

 The big question has to be "are debian doing the right things here ?".
I don't use hotplug, or udev, but I remember seeing posts every few
weeks on l-k related to one of these two packages where the problems are

 My understanding, at least for the udev side, was that Greg K-H was
using gentoo on one of his boxes and was mostly happy with the gentoo
implementation of it.  Apologies if I've confused unrelated issues.

[ mostly snipped ]
> 050_net.agent_ifupdown: debian specific network management with
> ifupdown. We have to do something similar sooner or later.

 The debian boot configuration management has to be the least-common way
of doing things, in my opinion.  I'd be very reluctant to follow their
lead in anything to do with bootscripts.  (not generally anti-debian, I
like a lot of what they do, but some of it is over the top).

 das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list