Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 24 Feb 2000 08:00:17 +1100 | From | Richard Gooch <> | Subject | Re: [patch-2.3.47] /proc/driver/microcode -> /dev/cpu/microcode |
| |
Tigran Aivazian writes: > On Wed, 23 Feb 2000, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > > Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 16:11:21 +1100 > > From: Richard Gooch <rgooch@atnf.csiro.au> > > > > I'd advocate we move from a "tough, use procfs" attitude to a "tough, > > use devfs" attitude. If you don't want to have devfs in your kernel, > > you wouldn't want procfs either (if being consistent). After all, > > devfs doesn't *have* to be mounted over /dev. > > > > You know, it wasn't that long ago that you said that using devfs should > > be a choice, and not something that would ever be forced. Now you're > > saying "tough, use devfs". I guess your earlier statements were just > > made to pursuade people to accept it into the kernel, and now you're > > changing your mind? > > Theodore, with all due respect, I think you are being a bit tough on > Richard. It is inevitable that initial acceptance of an idea > requires some smooth talking and convincing whilst when the idea is > accepted one could go on and gently push humans towards doing the > right thing as a norm as opposed to as "optional". There is nothing > wrong about that. Richard pushed me a bit towards converting > microcode to devfs and my only resistance (as I found out) was due > to ignorance - when that is overcome I am only grateful to him that > he cared enough to convince me.
It's also because in private email Linus has pushed me further than I was intending to go. He basically took off the reigns and gave me a nudge :-)
Regards,
Richard.... Permanent: rgooch@atnf.csiro.au Current: rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca
- 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/
| |