Messages in this thread | | | From | (david parsons) | Subject | Re: PUBLIC CHALLENGE: (was RE: devfs again, (was RE: USB device a lloc ation) ) | Date | 8 Oct 1999 01:09:51 -0700 |
| |
In article <linux.kernel.19991007222450.63507@work.bitmover.com>, Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com> wrote:
>One last comment: as far as I can tell, most people aren't against devfs, >they are against the current implementation. The basic idea is useful at >some level. If that is correct, perhaps you're all arguing about nothing >(not that I've ever done that; sigh).
Well, the best way to fix the implementation would then be to include it in 2.3.x and let the legion of kernel hackers fix the problems with it.
____ david parsons \bi/ I wish there was a devfs for 2.0.<29 so I \/ could be using it in non-test kernels.
- 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/
| |