lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Dec]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: State of devfs in 2.6?
Date
Andrew Walrond <andrew@walrond.org> writes:

> My initial query has thrown up lots of interesting debate :)
>
> I, like most people I suspect, love the concept of a complete auto-populated
> dev directory, and not having to MAKEDEV.

So do I.

> devfs provided this, but like most people who read LKML, I stopped using it
> when it's problems were discussed.
>
> I really hope udev lives up to its promise, unlike devfs. Manually creating /
> dev just annoys me for no apparent reason other than it's plain inelegance I
> suppose.

Does anyone else remember all the talk about the supreme elegance of
devfs back when it was new?

--
Måns Rullgård
mru@kth.se

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:59    [W:0.196 / U:0.112 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site