Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 29 Mar 2000 08:55:38 -0500 (EST) | From | Alexander Viro <> | Subject | Re: [OT should end] Re: Location of shmfs; devfs automagics |
| |
On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Blu3Viper wrote:
> I'm sorry but this is uncalled for. Some people are excessively crass > when they don't like something. Having a completely magic /dev appears to > be perfectly acceptable to plenty of people. It's a kernel option not a > requirement, let it be. In point A you bespeak evil of hard coded things > and yet you want a hard coded template in point D.
Template that consists of empty root directory. The point being: if we can have _some_ ->fs->root and ->fs->pwd from the very beginning then a lot of code will become cleaner - less special-casing, yodda, yodda.
> As for point E, no. Flat out no. The current design of devfs is heavily > changed due to a lot of influence from Linus and related about how it should > be done. And for inflicting it upon you, again it is an option you > certainly are not required to implement either in part or whole. It is not > the perfect solution everyone wants but Linus has accepted it for the time > being.
I'm sorry, but what Linus had accepted is a huge can of worms, _some_ of which are going to be fixed before 2.4. Frankly, I'ld rather postpone the stuff with multiple mounts until 2.5. No such luck - devfs went in...
- 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/
| |