Re: [GIT PULL] kdbus for 4.1-rc1

[Andy Lutomirski]

On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 09:42:17PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> > I remain opposed to this half thought out trash of an ABI for the
>> > meta-data.
>>
>> You don't have to enable the metadata if you don't want to use it, it's
>> an option :)
>
> OK, _that_ argument needs to be stomped out.  It had been used before,
> and it was a deliberate scam.  There is no such thing as optional kernel
> interface, especially when udev/dbus/systemd crowd is nearby.  We'd been
> through that excuse before; remember how devtmpfs was pushed in as "optional"?
>
> This is a huge red flag.  On the level of "I need your account information
> to transfer $200M you might have inherited from my deceased client".
>
> Just to recap how it went the last time around: Kay kept pushing his piece of
> code into the tree, claiming that it was optional, that nobody who doesn't
> like it has to enable it, so what's the problem?  OK, in it went.  And pretty
> soon udev (maintained by the same... meticulously honorable person) had
> stopped working on the kernels that didn't have that enabled.
>
> We had been there before.  To paraphrase another... meticulously honorable
> person, "if you didn't want something relied upon, why have you put it into the
> kernel?" Said person is on the record as having no problem whatsoever with
> adding dependencies to the bottom of userland stack.

It appears that, if kdbus is merged, upstream udev may end up requiring it:

http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-May/019657.html

Grumble.

--Andy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/