![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
David: David Brownell wrote: >The downside of "disable-and-remove-later" is that it becomes >too easy to just re-enable the Kconfig stuff rather than just >fixing the userspace bugs. Expecting userspace to change at >any point before it absolutely _must_ tends to be a formula >for userspace never changing, sadly enough. > >If 2.6.13 doesn't remove devfs, when will it really go away? > > Good point. I've come this far somewhat reluctantly, but can see that udev is a better long-term solution. Once devfs is gone, it's easier for me to justify doing the work to go fully over to udev (GregKH, can you post a link or two to those "packages" you refer to?). And also, once devfs is gone it's an easier economic decision for my customers, too: either they move ahead and get whatever new features that non-devfs kernels offer, or they do the work to keep the current stuff in the state they want it. It's their call, I (sometimes) get paid either way... And it isn't like just my customers would be in this situation, everyone will have to face it. So it's "fair" for everyone. So, I guess I'm into the "say goodbye to devfs" camp now. In case anyone asks, that is. :^) b.g. -- Bill Gatliff Build a man a fire, and he's warm for the rest of the night. Set a man on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life. -- Anonymous 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 05:29 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||