[arch-dev-public] How old kernel to "support" - Was: [signoff] coreutils-7.5

Thomas Bächler thomas at archlinux.org
Tue Aug 25 03:50:02 EDT 2009

Allan McRae schrieb:
> Uh...  so we can not have a static dev fs?   Wasn't that the whole 
> argument against bumping the kernel version required for glibc too 
> high?  Or has the situation changed enough with the new udev to revisit 
> that issue?

it wasn't possible anyway, you just got an empty ramfs in /dev. Since 
then, you could theoretically have your static nodes in 
/lib/udev/devices, run pacman -Rd udev (initscripts depend on it) and 
they would be copied over to /dev on startup. I doubt anyone even tried 
to do that.

It will still work, it will simply try to start udev, fail and use the 
static /dev. I just don't see a point in having a code path here which 
we don't support at all.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 260 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/attachments/20090825/f485784f/attachment.pgp>

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list