With udev, are dev and MAKEDEV still required?

[David T Hollis]

On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 23:07 -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 21:15:34 -0400, David T Hollis
> <dhollis at davehollis.com> wrote:
> > With udev now handling /dev and repopulating upon reboot, it seems that
> > the dev and MAKEDEV packages are no longer relevant.  
> 
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=130746
> 
> I'm not sure its safe to say the static dev packages are completely
> irrelevant now.
> 

In looking into the dev requirement for which (which struck me as quite
odd), I found this bug report:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99275 .  The which
package needs dev so that the postinstall scripts calling install-info
can use "> /dev/null".  There were ordering problems with 'which' being
installed before 'dev' since 'which' doesn't have much in the way of
requirements.  I suppose it may be better to have a requirement
on /dev/null, though currently only 'dev' provides it.  If there is a
future without 'dev' (optional or mandatory), that sort of scenario will
need to be addressed.


-- 
David T Hollis <dhollis at davehollis.com>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20040825/d9fe5b3a/attachment.sig>