It's completely untrue that persistence for devfs is a gross hack. It
is true that the current user space scheme (using tar) is a hack. And
I've had plans right from the start to address that. But that is a
user space issue and shouldn't be held against devfs.
With devfsd, I have a very nice way of implementing persistence. I can
support the existing semantics, where a sysadmin goes in and manually
changes things, and I already support a more powerful scheme where
groups of device entries are "saved".
Regards,
Richard....
-
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/