[oe] [PATCH 2/2] udev: moved udevadm to the main udev package

[Otavio Salvador]

Hello,

On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Phil Blundell <philb at gnu.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-05-25 at 13:59 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Phil Blundell <philb at gnu.org> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2009-05-25 at 13:31 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> [...]
>> >> I belive that the right way to fix it is add a binary package only for
>> >> udevadm
>> >
>> > That's pretty much what udev-utils is: it doesn't contain any binaries
>> > apart from udevadm.
>>
>> In this case the binary package is wrong.
>
> Why so?

I think udev-udevadm is more sound for me.

>> >> and make udev depends on it and mdev suggests it.
>> >
>> > Mdev itself doesn't have any use for udevadm, so having mdev Recommend
>> > udev-utils wouldn't be the right thing; this would just be a waste of
>> > space for people who are using mdev without HAL (which, I suspect, is
>> > actually the majority of mdev users).
>>
>> Agreed. But AFAIK suggested packages do not get installed by bitbake by default.
>
> Ah yes, sorry, I misread your first mail.  Having mdev Suggest
> udev-utils would indeed be harmless since you're right, ipkg doesn't
> install suggestions automatically.  It would still be fairly pointless
> though since nothing in mdev makes any use of udev-utils.

Or maybe hal ought to depends on udev-(utils|udevadm) instead ;-)

-- 
Otavio Salvador                  O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio at ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854         http://projetos.ossystems.com.br