From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264127AbTLWWDf (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Dec 2003 17:03:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264937AbTLWWDe (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Dec 2003 17:03:34 -0500 Received: from mail.kroah.org ([65.200.24.183]:21480 "EHLO perch.kroah.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264127AbTLWWCS (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Dec 2003 17:02:18 -0500 Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 14:02:09 -0800 From: Greg KH To: Mark Mielke Cc: Ian Kent , Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: DevFS vs. udev Message-ID: <20031223220209.GB15946@kroah.com> Reply-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20031223173429.GA9032@mark.mielke.cc> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031223173429.GA9032@mark.mielke.cc> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 23, 2003 at 12:34:29PM -0500, Mark Mielke wrote: > > I blame the udev people for this thread. :-) I blame all of the Gentoo users for this thread, and the ability for them to constantly dig up old threads that have been hashed out many times in the past without ever checking the archives. I need more egg-nog... greg k-h (yeah, it's probably not _all_ gentoo people, but it sure seems like the majority of them sure are wed to devfs for some strange reason...)