Re: USB device allocation
Martin Dalecki (dalecki@cs.net.pl)
Tue, 05 Oct 1999 23:30:00 +0200
Brian Swetland wrote:
>
> [David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se>]
> > On Tue, 5 Oct 1999, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > > > > What about some spare entries for USB monitors, speakers, CDrecorders ?
> > > >
> > > > The desperate need for devfs becomes all more clear.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Actually, the need is for a decent-sized dev_t.
> >
> > With a decently sized dev_t we will still have the problem with a
> > cluttered /dev directory. With devfs we won't. And if you still want your
> > standard, cluttered, /dev directory, you can still have it with devfs. So
> > I can't really understand you being so negative in regard to devfs.
>
> Tradition! Big 'ol arrays and clutter are obviously better than a
> dynamic solution. Hot-plugable devices are a myth made up by people
> who don't realize that all hardware can be detected when you compile
> your kernel the way it should be. Config files are for people too dumb
> to recompile things when configurations change. That's sarcasm, btw.
And one should cure the disease (too short dev_t) instead of the
symptoms
(inventing devfs).
--Marcin
-
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/