[WIP] new package: libudev-zero

[dkwo]

https://github.com/illiliti/libudev-zero

• user must provide own alternative udevd (e.g. mdevd), and edit runit stage 1 script accordingly (see e.g. allow alternative udev void-runit#106 )
• I tested the changes in this PR: initram and init scripts, rebuilt some libraries with it
• I built this PR locally for my native architecture, (x86_64-musl)

[mobinmob]

You have quite a project in your hands :)
libudev-zero is not a eudev-libudev drop-in alternative :(
I have a PR open for the skarnet stack update, unfortunatelly [wip], I will finish it asap.
#41635

[mobinmob]

• how to deal with eudev-libudev: libudev-zero replaces, conflicts, provides it? it provides /usr/lib/libudev.so.1, I expect some stuff built with eudev-libudev-devel (wlroots, libinput) to work with it, while other may not if one removes eudev-libudev (lvm2, pipewire), see https://github.com/illiliti/libudev-zero

It is waaaay too early for this, but I think replaces is the wrong choice here.

• find an optimal mdev.conf (current one is taken from kiss-linux, alpine has a similar one)

That is not the only thing you need. You should look at the mdev-like-a-boss scripts and work with them and also checkout how you can extend the functionality in other ways.

[dkwo]

@mobinmob thanks, I rebased on your pr for now.

[dkwo]

libudev-zero is not a eudev-libudev drop-in alternative :(

From the project homepage: Drop-in replacement for libudev intended to work with any device manager

[mobinmob]

libudev-zero is not a eudev-libudev drop-in alternative :(

From the project homepage: Drop-in replacement for libudev intended to work with any device manager

Yes, that is the goal and the developer has done trully amazing work. Last time I checked it did not implement all the libudev api, so as far as that is concerned it has not yet reached that goal.
My comment was technically wrong though. I meant to highlight the work that should be done outside of the packaging of libudev-zero itself.
I happy @dkwo that you took it up ;)
BTW, checkout tinyramfs if you have not already - it is also written by @illiliti.

[dkwo]

how about void-linux/void-runit#106 ?

[dkwo]

Here's a puzzle: why do some packages (e.g. wlroots libinput) both run_depends on eudev-libudev and shlib-requires libudev.so.1? if they only did the latter, then the provides/conflicts in libudev-zero should be enough..

[dkwo]

btw, tinyramfs is now in the repo; it needs hostonly for now, but we can experiment more :)

[dkwo]

rebuilt wlroots successfully, while libinput (due to libblkid) fails :)

[mobinmob]

@mobinmob can you include the mdevd commit in the skarnet update? it adds a service and config file (which you can edit).

Done, thanks!
I want to fork mdev-like-a-boss and turn it into a mdevd-only collection of configurations/scripts, but no idea when I 'll have the time...

[github-actions]

Pull Requests become stale 90 days after last activity and are closed 14 days after that. If this pull request is still relevant bump it or assign it.

[github-actions]

Pull Requests become stale 90 days after last activity and are closed 14 days after that. If this pull request is still relevant bump it or assign it.

[github-actions]

Pull Requests become stale 90 days after last activity and are closed 14 days after that. If this pull request is still relevant bump it or assign it.

[xplshn]

libudev-zero confirmed working with Pipewire through a small patch to libudev-zero: illiliti/libudev-zero#69

What is blocking this one from being packaged?

[xplshn]

@dkwo this is an unrelated question, do you know how to create a busybox based Void install? You seem interested in the GNUless linux landscape of things

[dkwo]

the package per se should be ok. maybe wait until they merge that patch and tag a new release?
to be useful, it needs smth like mdev-like a boss. the runit part could not be merged, not sure if we should drop it here.

(don't know much about busybox, but i've been playing with dinit, and i like it. it's also packaged, but not as init for now.
for the coreutils part, you might as well give chimera linux a try.)

[xplshn]

I didn't find the chimera community welcoming, at all. And I was also looking for a more Unix approach to Linux distros... Think I will stick to Alpine, nBSD and Void (in that order).

[github-actions]

Pull Requests become stale 90 days after last activity and are closed 14 days after that. If this pull request is still relevant bump it or assign it.

[xplshn]

Any updates on this?

[dkwo]

You need to provide your own alternative to udevd, e.g. mdevd (change init scripts, provide a service and config for mdevd).

Maybe there's a better way to deal with conflicts/replaces. (E.g. in Alpine apk a package can depend on libudev.so.1 cleanly, and then they'd use

provides="udev"
replaces="udev"
provider_priority=20

in the libudev-zero package.) Just not sure if this can be achieved in xbps at present.

[ahesford]

At this time, we aren't interested in supporting alternative udev implementations on Void.