Comment 9 for bug 1153224

On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 09:55:48PM -0000, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> It seemed to me like the discussion on IRC today went back and forth about
> if the switch to logind and the udev transition needed to be tied together
> and if not, which was more important to do first.

This was mostly a matter of me playing catch-up with pitti, who had a much
better understanding of the interdependencies than I did and has been
aggressively pursuing this in a ppa over the past few days.

The plan we came up with was the following:

1) update systemd to a more recent upstream version (19x), as this is a
prerequisite for obsoleting ConsoleKit from the seeds. (requires an FFe for
the new upstream version)
2) rebuild the archive against libudev1, now built from systemd.
3) in parallel, fix the udev package to not build libudev0, and to drop the
hard-coded udev->libudev0 dep.
4) seed logind in place of consolekit+libpam-xdg-support, and transition
reverse-dependencies to logind. (Requires a second FFe - and we may stop
here for 13.04, depending on available time.)
5) post-13.04, revisit the question of getting a newer udev with libkmod
support.

> Given that this we just thought up in mid-cycle, rather than planned,

For the record, this was blueprinted a while ago (back at UDS-Q); the latest
session concerned the finer details of how to migrate to logind now that
it's available, the fact that we've had a further detailed discussion should
not be taken as an indication that this is a new thought.