lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Jun]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Devfs implementation.
    I'm not sure why people are resisting Devfs.  When I first found out
    about it, I thought it was a great idea. There are some semantics
    issues (ie: cdrom, mouse, video, and other common links need some form
    of persistency and need to be pointing to the correct devices), but on
    the whole it's a good concept.
    Another point that I'm not sure if it has been missed, is that the
    average user can't just go and make a new link in the /dev tree without
    a proper understanding of it. Creating links for devices you have added
    is a huge chore. Is the average user who is currently using windows
    going to understand major and minor device numbers for creating a link?
    No. One of the main reasons I love Linux is that is it, for the most
    part, self-maintaining. Devfs is a continuation of this, and allows
    easier shims of things like dynamic devices in the future. Would you
    argue that procfs should also be a dir with major and minor number node
    links for parts of kernel information? Linux is currently a good server
    solution, but it won't be a good desktop solution until ideas such as
    devfs are implemented.

    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:52    [W:0.018 / U:93.452 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site