Re: Switching to udev?

[Alyssa Ross <hi@alyssa.is>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1450 bytes --]

Demi Marie Obenour <demiobenour@gmail.com> writes:

> On 7/29/25 03:29, Alyssa Ross wrote:
>> Demi Marie Obenour <demiobenour@gmail.com> writes:
>> 
>>> I think libudev-zero can work fine in the VMs that have no physical
>>> hardware, especially with flatpaks that can't access udev at all.
>>> It's the host and VMs with physical hardware we don't have, and thus
>>> cannot test, that I am concerned about.  systemd-udevd is much more
>>> likely to have gotten a patch from someone else to fix an issue we
>>> would never run into ourselves, and which might well cost us a user.
>> 
>> Does udev upstream quirk a lot of hardware, then?  That wasn't mentioned
>> so far.
>
> See https://github.com/systemd/systemd/tree/db1e099a7aed117e3ffdb1e4c69cf3e37cab0fc6/hwdb.d
> and the systemd issues that have the "hwdb" label.  I'm not sure how much
> of this is just for human-friendly names and how much of actually affects
> behavior, but at least the input device quirks seem relevant.

Okay, I read through the git log of hwdb.d/60-input-id.hwdb, and it does
seem like these quirks will be important for Spectrum users, e.g.
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/libinput/libinput/-/issues/932#note_2069967

Maybe if we manage to move stuff like input handling or even the
compositor out of the host system, we can go back to something smaller
like we have now, but until then I suppose systemd-udevd is the way to
go on the host.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]