lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Feb]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch-2.3.47] /proc/driver/microcode -> /dev/cpu/microcode
Hi Ted.

>> The way I envisioned it, a disc-based /dev would have (for
>> example) /dev/cpu being a symlink to $devfsroot/cpu Having
>> two hierarchies encoded isn't good.

> I'd much prefer the "/devfs" solution. That means one symlink
> for folks who want to use devfs, and one mountpoint for folks
> who don't.

> Compare this to how many symlinks we would need to put into /dev
> in the non-devfs case, assuming that people start moving into
> kitchen sink into devfs, and it's just not pretty.

Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but if the two heirarchies are
close enough together for a /dev/fs -> /dev symlink to work, they're
presumably also close enough for a /dev -> /devfs symlink to work?

If so, what's the point of this argument?

Best wishes from Riley.

* Copyright (C) 1999, Memory Alpha Systems.
* All rights and wrongs reserved.

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| There is something frustrating about the quality and speed of Linux |
| development, ie., the quality is too high and the speed is too high, |
| in other words, I can implement this XXXX feature, but I bet someone |
| else has already done so and is just about to release their patch. |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
* http://www.memalpha.cx/Linux/Kernel/

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:56    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans