> danielt@digi.com said:
>
> [...]
>
> > 90% of the objections to having devfs in the kernel
> > are easily solved with "well don't use it then".
>
> Wrong. Having devfs in the kernel has an impact on _all_ devices, if they
> use it or not. Giving the option has even more impact here than just
> forcing it one way or the other.
I'm sorry, but I fail to understand your reasoning behind this statement.
Could you please clarify? How is a driver which presents a traditional
major/minor number interface affected by the presence of a devfs (which,
presumably, uses a different interface to the driver).
> A driver is something quite different: If the source is in the kernel or
> not has very minimal impact, a few lines outside of the driver itself.
> There is does make sense to apply kitchen-sink mentality, with core kernel
> functionality is just does not.
A driver is different from what? Please clarify. I'm having great
difficulty understanding how this paragraph applies to the one before it,
and how it is supposed to refute danielt's statement. Where is the
'kitchen-sink mentality' to which you refer?
Matt Dharm
-- Matthew Dharm InterNIC: MDD94 Engineer Cell: (619) 890-6943 Home: mdharm@one-eyed-alien.net Home: (858) 689-1908 Beep: page-matt@one-eyed-alien.net Beep: (858) 621-8155YOU SEE!!?? It's like being born with only one nipple! -- Erwin User Friendly, 10/19/1998
- 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/