Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 22 Jul 2004 13:32:13 +0200 | From | "Giacomo A. Catenazzi" <> | Subject | Re: New dev model (was [PATCH] delete devfs) |
| |
Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 02:55:39AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Users have had the 6-12 month warning about devfs for a while now :) > And udev is currently available in the latest distro versions of: > - Red Hat > - SuSE > - Gentoo > - Debian > - Mandrake > > While devfs is only supported in Gentoo at this time (and udev fills > that support issue for those users.)
I've still some bug report of people using home-compiled devfs kernels on Debian. So people still use it. You say "devfs" is buggy, but it works on nearly all cases, so people tend not to switch.
The worse is the lack of stable name of devices, in udev too. I.e. microcode loader (Intel CPU) needs a device, which was so named (last time I controlled): # device name in LANANA / devices.txt DEVICE=/dev/cpu/microcode # device name in devfsd DEVICE2=/dev/misc/microcode # device name in udev DEVICE3=/dev/microcode
If we a coherent *default* device name scheme, the switching from a kernel utility to other would be trivial.
ciao cate
Note: /dev/cpu/microcode was also created by devfs until recent 2.4 kernels and the whole 2.6 serie.
> > >>That being said, mid-2005 would be an appropriate time to remove devfs. If >>that schedule pushes things along faster than they would otherwise have >>progressed, well, good. > > > Ok, if people think that would really change anything, I'll wait a year. > I'm patient :)
- 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/
| |