From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262787AbTLIK6t (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Dec 2003 05:58:49 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262765AbTLIK6t (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Dec 2003 05:58:49 -0500 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.224.249]:15066 "EHLO main.gmane.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262762AbTLIK5v (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Dec 2003 05:57:51 -0500 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: mru@kth.se (=?iso-8859-1?q?M=E5ns_Rullg=E5rd?=) Subject: Re: State of devfs in 2.6? Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 11:57:48 +0100 Message-ID: References: <200312081536.26022.andrew@walrond.org> <200312081559.04771.andrew@walrond.org> <20031208233840.GD31370@kroah.com> <200312091037.20770.andrew@walrond.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) XEmacs/21.4 (Rational FORTRAN, linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:MlrLU1CbC5xIlNK4+fchRSby+30= Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andrew Walrond 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