Messages in this thread | | | From | Shawn Leas <> | Subject | [OT] RE: [linux-usb] Re: USB device allocation | Date | Wed, 6 Oct 1999 17:07:08 -0500 |
| |
How about option three where we accept the problem, but when any solution is given, stubbornly deny that it solves any problem without even trying it?
Oh, in case some of you don't get it, I'm making fun of you... You know who you are! Hehehehe...
-Shawn
-----Original Message----- From: David Weinehall [mailto:tao@acc.umu.se] To: Linux Kernel Developer Mailing-list Subject: RE: [linux-usb] Re: USB device allocation
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.
- 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/
| |