[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:0.184 / U:29.348 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site