Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 6 Oct 1999 14:34:39 -0700 (PDT) | From | Matthew Dharm <> | Subject | RE: [linux-usb] Re: USB device allocation |
| |
Just to make sure everyone is on the same page, let's explicitly list all of the mentioned options. As I see it, the fall into 3 categories:
1) devfs, plus configuration daemon 2) Static assignment, plus daemon if needed 3) Rolling assignment (as I proposed, I don't think this made it to the linux-kernel list... if not, I should resend those messages), plus daemon
Are there any other proposals on the table that I've missed?
Matt Dharm
On Wed, 6 Oct 1999, David Weinehall wrote:
> My opinion on devfs is, that as a lot of people refuse to accept it as the > solution, we have two options. > > Either the people that oppose devfs come up with something better ("Show > us the code!") > > or > > We ignore this problem completely and continue with static devices and a > growingly insane device-system. > > > /David > _ _ > // David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /> Northern lights wander \\ > // Project MCA Linux hacker // Dance across the winter sky // > \> http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ </ Full colour fire </ > > >
-- Matthew Dharm InterNIC: MDD94 Engineer Cell: (619) 890-6943 Home: mdharm@one-eyed-alien.net Home: (858) 689-1908 Beep: page-matt@one-eyed-alien.net Beep: (858) 621-8155
I could always suspend a few hundred accounts and watch what happens. -- Tanya User Friendly, 7/31/1998
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |