>> Richard, if I produced an emasculated version of the patch that only
>> populates a flat filesystem with major and minor numbers required,
>> would you accept it?
>I doubt it. I can't see the point. I'm not willing to sacrifice useful
>features for the sake of satisfying some people's idealogical vision
>of purity. I've spent more time than I should have explaining why I
>think that vision is flawed.
I can certainly understand that, but I'm an impatient sort and I
really really REALLY want to have a devfs in the kernel; a flat
filesystem[1] isn't any worse than 100-e% of the current Linux
systems are, and if it would put a devfs into the mainline kernel
that would still be better than the traditional way of doing things.
____
david parsons \bi/ Though a port to 2.0.28 would be nice :-)
\/
[1: which can't really be flat, because of the ptx subdirectory [2] ]
[2: Isn't that a devfs? What's it doing in the kernel, anyway? ]
-
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/