Messages in this thread | | | From | Shawn Leas <> | Subject | RE: PUBLIC CHALLENGE: (was RE: devfs again, (was RE: USB device a lloc ation) ) | Date | Fri, 8 Oct 1999 15:09:38 -0500 |
| |
From: Stephen Frost [mailto:sfrost@mail.snowman.net] Subject: Re: PUBLIC CHALLENGE: (was RE: devfs again, (was RE: USB device a lloc ation) )
>> arguments, or they make no sense. (BTW, I think that's microsoft's >> problem.... they only consider the common case, not the full range of >> possibilities.)
> I think the problem is, a replacement/permanent fix to the way /dev >is done currently would be nice. devfs is a step in the right direction, >but it needs to be something that can replace what is there otherwise it >isn't worth it to just add it on without fixing the real problem. As such, >just saying "don't use it" isn't a good argument.
1) Your paragraph is invalid because devfs can be used in a number of capacities a) Fully replace standard /dev, and run in total compatibility mode. (And it has persistence with devfsd, no more bullshit from you people) b) Allow for automatic population of standard /dev c) deconfigured. 2) You've all been notified of these very same things a zillion times.
- 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/
| |