> This is likely another stupid question. But I've readed some of the debate
> on kernel, user space separation, how it is a Good Thing. And then I see
> things like autofs being included in the kernel, just on the surface at least,
> that would seem to be inconsistent with kernel-user separation. No other
> Unix system out there, that I know of, has included autofs/automount/amd stuff
> into the kernel, and it's inclusion in Linux struck me as funny, even before
> I saw the debate on this list. What benefit does Linux get in including
> autofs? And is it not a violation of kernel-user separation?
There are significant problems and artefacts with implementing the automounter
correctly only in userspace and only a kernel implementation can do these
things right. The kernel-user separation principle are not violated by this -
most of the code still is in a userspace daemon.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org