lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jun]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [GIT PATCH] Remove devfs from 2.6.12-git
Andrew:


>>It breaks a lot of my embedded setups which have read-only storage only
>>and thus need /dev on devfs or tmpfs.
>>
>>
>
>Well that's quite a problem. We're certainly causing people such as
>yourself to take on quite a lot of work. But on the other hand we do want
>the kernel to progress sanely, and that sometimes involves taking things
>out.
>
>I don't have enough info to know whether the world would be a better place
>if we keep devfs, remove devfs or remove devfs even later on. I don't
>think anyone knows, which is why we're taking this little
>disable-it-and-see-who-shouts approach.
>
>

I would prefer to keep devfs around as well, but most of my embedded
systems have enough RAM to put a primitive /dev tree in tmpfs using a
linuxrc script at boot. The workarounds for the userland requirements
of udev are a little less clear to me, but I'm not sure they're
insurmountable yet for anything except the smallest embedded systems,
since Busybox appears to have some udev support available now.

I think that devfs and udev appeal to different audiences, hence I don't
think you can say that the "world will be a better place" with one or
the other. It would be nice to find a way to have the two coexist
peacefully...

Case in point. I'm going to udev reluctantly; all my embedded work
based on earlier kernels used devfs exclusively.


b.g.

--
Bill Gatliff
So what part of:
$ make oldconfig clean dep zImage
do you not understand?
bgat@billgatliff.com

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-06-23 04:27    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans