Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 18 Jul 2003 08:44:17 +0100 | From | Christoph Hellwig <> | Subject | Re: devfsd |
| |
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 07:57:24AM +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote: > Apart from obvious/known inefficiencies, it works fine over here :P > > Any way, if you are serious, what make you consider it broken (no, > not talking about personal preferences/phobias 8)
There's unsolvable design issues in the way devfsd communication works (with the last two patches the holes are closed as much as possible) and it's fundamentally flawed by putting device name policy into the kernel. And then there's of course certain implementation quality issues...
We have udev now which solves what devfs tried to solve without that issues so people should switch to that ASAP. That doesn't mean we can simply rip it out because people started to rely on the non-standard device names, but it's use is pretty much discouraged in 2.6.
- 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/
| |