[lfs-dev] udev, eudev, mdev

Pierre Lorenzon devel at pollock-nageoire.net
Wed Mar 5 00:41:00 PST 2014

From: Bruce Dubbs <bruce.dubbs at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lfs-dev] udev, eudev, mdev
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 10:43:49 -0600

> Armin K. wrote:
>> On 03/04/2014 04:23 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>> I've been working on udev and have got it to build with the systemd-210
>>> source.  The problem is that it is getting more and more intertwined
>>> with the rest of systemd requiring things that don't seem to be applicable.
>>> For instance,
>>> filea.c requires a function from
>>> fileb.c which requires a function from
>>> filec.c.
>>> The problem is that filea really doesn't require anything from filec,
>>> but the build process doesn't like unresolved references.
>>> My question is whether we need to try either eudev or mdev.  Does anyone
>>> have any experience with eudev or mdev?
>>> I note that the latest eudev is dated today.
>>> http://dev.gentoo.org/~blueness/eudev/
>> eudev is rather the udev from pre-systemd merge with all the latest
>> fixes pulled from systemd tree.
>> Note sure, but I think mdev is something else and not really compatible
>> with original udev. eudev seems to be the best solution for (B)LFS.
> One difference that jumped out at me was that systemd's libudev is 1.4.0 
> and eudev's version is 1.3.0.  I don't know how much that changes things.
> eudev wants gperf and gtk-doc.  We could add gperf to LFS and probably 
> do away with both gperf and the gudev build in BLFS.  gtk-doc needs 
> several other prerequisites and is not a candidate for LFS, but I don't 
> think that's needed.

  On clfs we used eudev 1.3 but nieghter gperf nor gtk-doc are



>    -- Bruce
> -- 
> http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
> FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
> Unsubscribe: See the above information page

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list