[lkml]   [2003]   [Dec]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: DevFS vs. udev
    On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Rob Love wrote:

    > On Tue, 2003-12-23 at 20:52, Ian Kent wrote:
    > > It certainly seems like a good project for a someone, such as myself, that
    > > is new to kernel development.
    > Please take no offense to this, but it is an awful project for someone
    > new to kernel development. Plenty of knowledgeable/semi-knowledgeable
    > kernel hackers looked at devfs and given up on it. Despite what some
    > people say about Richard, he is a good guy, and he did not succeed
    > either.

    None taken.

    I understand your view but my point here (at this stage) is not
    necessarily to revive devfs development but to provide some maintenance
    only support for those that need it during the (what appears to be
    inevitable) transition. In particular, keeping it around while people
    still need it.

    > devfs is hard to get right and, worse, you will be starting with a bad
    > base of code that I would not want to touch with an 18.72 foot pole.
    > Greg, via udev, has made it so easy to just back up, slowly, and walk
    > away from devfs. devfs is not going anywhere in 2.6, I do not think,
    > but let sleeping piles of crap sleep and let's just jettison this thing
    > as soon as we can.

    Ohh! Nasty pastie.

    > Just my two cents - I am warning you ;)

    My mother always said I was deaf.


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:59    [W:0.019 / U:3.356 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site