[lkml]   [2005]   [Jul]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [GIT PATCH] Remove devfs from 2.6.12-git

    >Greg KH writes:
    >> I do care about this, please don't think that. But here's my reasoning
    >> for why it needs to go:
    >> - original developer of devfs has publicly stated udev is a
    >> replacement.
    >Well, that's news to me!

    What is more news to me:
    ( )
    Q: Why was devfs marked OBSOLETE if udev is not finished yet?
    A: To quote Al Viro (Linux VFS kernel maintainer):
    ==> - the devfs maintainer/author disappeared and stoped maintaining the code

    So, if you allow the question, where [t.h.] have you been in the meantime?

    >> - clutter and mess
    >In the eye of the beholder.
    It's kernel code - I think the point is valid.

    >> - code is broken and unfixable
    >No proof. Never say never...

    *thumbs up* You could just become the maintainer of ndevfs. :)

    Something's wondering me, though:
    FreeBSD "just" (5.0) introduced devfs, so either they are behind The Facts
    (see udev FAQ), or devfs (anylinux/anybsd) is not so bad after all.

    Jan Engelhardt
    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: 2005-07-18 22:16    [W:0.019 / U:7.912 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site