Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: devfs to be obsloted by udev? | From | Justin Cormack <> | Date | 03 Sep 2003 10:38:48 +0100 |
| |
On Tue, 2003-09-02 at 21:19, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > initramfs
which seems to have been postponed to 2.7.
> On Tuesday 02 of September 2003 16:09, Ed Sweetman wrote: > > It appears that devfs is to be replaced by the use of udev in the not so > > distant future. I'm not sure how it's supposed to replace a static /dev > > situaton seeing as how it is a userspace daemon. Is it not supposed to > > replace /dev even when it's completed? I dont see the real benefit in > > having two directories that basically give the same info. Right now we > > have something like that with proc and sysfs although not everything in > > proc makes sense to be in sysfs and both are virtual fs's where as /dev > > is a static fs on the disk that takes up space and inodes and includes > > way too many files that a system may not use. If udev is to take over > > the job of devfs, how will modules and drivers work that require device > > files to be present in order to work since undoubtedly the udev daemon > > will have to wait until the kernel is done booting before being run. > > > > I'm just not following how it is going to replace devfs and thus why > > devfs is being abandoned as mentioned in akpm's patchset. Or as it > > seems, already has been abandoned. > > - > 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/
- 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/
| |