[lfs-dev] LFS SVN and Systemd Report

Andrew Benton andy at benton.eu.com
Thu May 31 05:21:17 PDT 2012


On Thu, 31 May 2012 00:58:08 +0100
Ken Moffat <zarniwhoop at ntlworld.com> wrote:

>  Actually, for some of us they *are* scary.  I thought I was making
> some progress (persuaded autoreconf to complete without errors using
> the attached -A.patch), but then configure went into an infinite
> loop spewing out '=no' lines.  That's around the check to see if we
> only want udev.  But after the test for whether to build static
> libraries

I also got the same result from trying to make Dan's patch work, just
after checking whether to build the static libraries it started spewing
out '=no' lines. If I redirected it to a file (to try and see the
start) the file quickly grew to be enormous. To me, the problem with
autofoo isn't that it's scary it's just that it's obscure and difficult
to follow. I agree that the autofoo approach is the one most likely to
be accepted upstream but Bruce's more direct approach seems to be
paying dividends in the short term.

When they merged udev and systemd they said that it'd be possible to
install just udev without systemd but with the very first merged
release it is impossible to install udev without all of systemd's
dependencies...it makes me wonder if we should move away from using
udev. Xorg would seem to be the problem there. I'm tempted to try and
get Xorg to work on a system without udev.

Andy



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list