Linux-kernel mailing list archive 2000-15,: Re: devfs - why not ?

# Re: devfs - why not ?

Aaron Sethman (androsyn@ratbox.org)
Sat, 15 Apr 2000 00:42:06 -0400 (EDT)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Ed Carp: "Re: Suggested dual human/binary interface for proc/devfs"
- Next message: Ion Badulescu: "Re: Suggested dual human/binary interface for proc/devfs"
- Previous message: Albert D. Cahalan: "Re: Suggested dual human/binary interface for proc/devfs"
- Next in thread: David Elliott: "Device Naming, was: Re: devfs - why not ?"
- Maybe reply: David Elliott: "Device Naming, was: Re: devfs - why not ?"
- Maybe reply: Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl: "/dev/volumes - was: Re: devfs - why not ?"

It seems to me that the largest issue that most people have with devfs is
namespace. Perhaps something that should be considered is a .h file that
keeps customized namespace stored in it. At least this way namespace
decisions won't be scattered through the kernel and not stuck in devfsd if
the user doesn't want to do that. Then at least you can do neat things
like CONFIG_DEVFS_OLD_STYLE_LAYOUT or CONFIG_DEVFS_NEW_STYLE_LAYOUT or for
the truly sick at heart CONFIG_DEVFS_I_LOVE_SOLARIS_AND_ITS_DEVICES_TREE.

Just an idea...If nobody wants to work on something like this, I might
have the time for it...

Aaron

-
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/

- Next message: Ed Carp: "Re: Suggested dual human/binary interface for proc/devfs"
- Next message: Ion Badulescu: "Re: Suggested dual human/binary interface for proc/devfs"
- Previous message: Albert D. Cahalan: "Re: Suggested dual human/binary interface for proc/devfs"
- Next in thread: David Elliott: "Device Naming, was: Re: devfs - why not ?"
- Maybe reply: David Elliott: "Device Naming, was: Re: devfs - why not ?"
- Maybe reply: Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl: "/dev/volumes - was: Re: devfs - why not ?"