Re: [PATCH] 2.5.68-bk1 crash in devfs_remove() for defpts files

[Grzegorz Jaskiewicz <gj@pointblue.com.pl>]

On Thu, 2003-04-24 at 12:46, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-04-24 at 09:57, Grzegorz Jaskiewicz wrote:
> 
> > Well, if you will read my post - i am trying to use _ONLY_ devfs,
> > without any demons.
> 
> Ok, missed that.
> 
> > Those demons are provided just to keep backward
> > compatbility (at least this is my opinion) and can be used without them.
> > 
> 
> Well, not really.  Yes, it does support the compat symlinks, etc, but
> you can do much more with devfsd than just that.  Setting the
> permissions/ownership on node registration, autoloading of modules
> if a node is accessed, etc is just a few.
Well, we don't need that - all we need is just file with settings cat-ed
to some /proc entry or script that sets up perms on boot/hotplug events.

> 
> > i don't like personaly any ideas about udevfs and others. We should get
> > rid of min/maj nr of each device becouse each single program uses device
> > by name indeed ! Having just devfs solves many problems and is very good
> > thing. But, again - without any userspace demons.
> > 
> 
> See above.
> 
> > Linus was always trying kernel as simple as it is possible, well - imho
> > devfs is just one step forward to make it even simpler but without
> > removing any of it functionality.
> > 
> 
> I guess you could see the management of devfs being done in userspace
> (devfsd) as keeping kernel side simple :P

Well, my point is - why i should install tons of userspace programs while everything can be/should be done internaly - becouse those demons are very close to kernel !
And it is pointles, kernel should be able to do everything required to be fully working by its self - not relay on some userspace shit.  

-- 
Grzegorz Jaskiewicz <gj@pointblue.com.pl>
K4 Labs