From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 14 May 2002 11:47:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 14 May 2002 11:47:50 -0400 Received: from vindaloo.ras.ucalgary.ca ([136.159.55.21]:32385 "EHLO vindaloo.ras.ucalgary.ca") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 14 May 2002 11:47:48 -0400 Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 09:47:37 -0600 Message-Id: <200205141547.g4EFlbR09184@vindaloo.ras.ucalgary.ca> From: Richard Gooch To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove compat code for old devfs naming scheme In-Reply-To: <20020514163347.A5474@infradead.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Christoph Hellwig writes: > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 08:59:41AM -0600, Richard Gooch wrote: > > The reason to support it is because lots of people are depending on > > it. A lot of systems would break for no real gain. This code is in the > > init section, so the memory will be freed before init(8) starts. > > > > The code should stay. In 2.5, I can move it into the mini devfsd that > > will go into the initial rootfs. > > Exactly how many system exist which > > a) still use the two or three year old devfs naming scheme for > their root= command line > b) use current 2.5 kernels Those names are not really "old", but convenient shorthand. And it's more systems than you think. > and > > c) have users not capable of translating that syntax to either > the new devfs or traditional Linux syntax? > > I don't think there are more then about ten, and no I _absolutely_ > do not consider that a reason to bloat the kernel, even if it is just > source and image bloat. A lot more people are using devfs than you realise. Removing the code would screw them over. Leave it alone. Regards, Richard.... Permanent: rgooch@atnf.csiro.au Current: rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca