Re: Suggested dual human/binary interface for proc/devfs

From: Linus Torvalds (torvalds@transmeta.com)
Date: Thu Apr 13 2000 - 10:31:17 EST


On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, Alexander Viro wrote:
>
> Umm... Linus, it's slightly more complex.

Everything always is. And yes, I think we need a deamon to track
additions. And I don't actually seriously think that using "tar" is a good
idea (if it was, you migth as well have a filesystem).

What I envision is more like "autofs", in fact. I really like autofs, and
it has nothing to do with the fact that Peter works in the room next-door.
It has everything to do with facts like being able to lookup the
information over NIS etc - which is exactly the kind of feature that I
think in the long run would be extremely cool for /devfs. And it's still
reasonably small, because the kernel doesn't make any real decisions.

Think of the administration advantages of something like _that_. And
that's why I think devfs is eventually really cool - not because of what
it does, but because of the _potential_.

The main reason for me to include devfs into the kernel was to try to move
the bickering about it from pure bickering to a more productive level.
Still bickering, but now, because it's integrated, I hope that not only
discussion but changes will be more open to people who might not otherwise
have cared.

                Linus

-
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/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Apr 15 2000 - 21:00:21 EST