Re: [PATCH] Allow disabling the build of all of systemd, leaving just udev

Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> William Hubbs wrote:
>> I spoke with Kay on irc, and he expressed doubts that it will be 
>> committed.
> 
> Not being terribly inclined to set up an IRC client, were there any
> issues with the patch itself?  Or does he just not like the idea at all
> for some reason?  (Er, Kay?  Maybe I should ask you directly.  :-) )
> 
>> However, I did get another suggestion from one of the guys there.
>>
>> Automake supports includes, so it would be good to break up 
>> Makefile.am into several modules. That way it would be easy to 
>> include them based on condissionals.
>>
>> I have started breaking things apart, but if you want, I can send you
>> the patch as I have it so far and we can collaborate on it. :-)

I'm interested in this too.  However, I'm not sure what you are 
referring to when you mention modules.  Do you mean the automake 
instruction 'include'?

The problem with udev as it's currently embedded in systemd is that the 
udev programs require several systemd .c utility programs, although they 
all build without the problematic libraries required by systemd 
(intltool, d-bus, etc).  These object files could be combined into each 
of the udev programs without problems, but I'm having a problem 
understanding the concept of what is acceptable.

AFAICT, there still needs to be a change to configure.ac to optionally 
avoid all the extras that systemd needs.  That seems to be where to 
start, but we need support from upstream to get these changes into the 
main distribution.

   -- Bruce
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hotplug" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html