Linux-kernel mailing list archive 1998-31,: single kernel tree ? was Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)

# single kernel tree ? was Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)

Christof Damian (damian@mediaconsult.com)
Wed, 05 Aug 1998 09:52:24 +0100

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Marcin Dalecki: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
- Previous message: Johan Karlberg: "Re: linux-kernel-digest V1 #2332"
- Maybe in reply to: Shawn Leas: "DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)"
- Next in thread: Miquel van Smoorenburg: "Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)"

Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
>
> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 11:23:55 +1000
> From: Richard Gooch <Richard.Gooch@atnf.CSIRO.AU>
>
> > However I don't think devfs will make it into 2.2. Also the kernel
> > gods have (had?) some issues with the concept entirely.
>
> IIRC, only HPA has had strong objections. Other kernel gods have
> either been quiet or supportive. And don't give up on devfs making it
> into 2.2: last I heard Linus is still "actively considering" it.
>
> Actually, that's not quite true. I had a chat with a number of other
> Linux kernel developers at the Linux Expo, and there was a substantial
> number who think devfs is really ugly and unnecessary. Personally, I've
> just decided to not waste time (and linux-kernel bandwidth) argueing
> about it given that it definitely won't make it into 2.2, and I haven't
> yet had the time to implement the smaller replacement solution which
> will hopefully head devfs off at the pass....

I think it would be a waste of resources to make another version of a
devfs. People are using devfs now and it seems to work for them. It is very
well supported and developed. Somehow I get the feeling that in the future
we won't have a single kernel-tree anymore. There are patches which are
used by a lot of people (devfs, safe-stack, kgi, driver updates, ac-kernel,
jumbo-kernel, linux-mama, pnp, pcmcia, sound, ...).

I think this will be a big mess in the future (maybe it allready is). The
current RedHat-kernel-RPM has about 30 source files and patches and a 2.2
version has probably has many more. It will come to a point where you can't
rely on the kernel features anymore.

It will be a PITA to support to, because you don't know which patch
combination triggers bugs.

It will be difficult to install some patches, because they overlap and a
user without C knowlege can't use patches anymore.

It might come to a point where you got to recompile you kernel, if you want
to run informix & co, because you need large-files, lvm, direct disk
access, or whatever.

And we will loose to big advantages of an open source kernel: "peer review"
to make the developers happy and "millions of eyes finding bugs"

I don't say I got a solution, but I don't like the way it is going now.

damian

    --
    Christof Damian
    Technical Director             ( mediaconsult is hiring:
    http://mediaconsult.com/         http://mediaconsult.com/wanted.html )

    -
    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.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html

- Next message: Marcin Dalecki: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
- Previous message: Johan Karlberg: "Re: linux-kernel-digest V1 #2332"
- Maybe in reply to: Shawn Leas: "DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)"
- Next in thread: Miquel van Smoorenburg: "Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)"